590 ACE-I and ARBS do not influence the chest CT presentation and 1-year survival of COVID-19 patients: Italian multicentre registry

Aims

A possible interference between ACE-i or ARBs with ACE-2 receptor and SARS-CoV-2 pathway has been raised. Despite data have shown no clinical impact of therapy with ACE-I or ARBs on COVID-19, these drugs are often discontinued upon hospitalization or diagnosis. To evaluate the effects of cardiovascular risk factors (CVRF) and prior outpatient therapy with RAAS inhibitors on the chest CT severity score performed within 24 h of diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection (before stopping medications or starting specific therapy for COVID-19) and on 1-year survival.

Methods and results

This is a multicentre, prospective, observational study. All admitted patients diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection who performed chest CT within 24 h of arrival were consecutively enrolled from 1 March to 1 June 2020. A severity score was attributed to Chest CT by two radiologists in blind to the patient’s clinical information and a cut-off value of 19.5 was considered to define severe radiological pneumonia. A 1-year telephone follow-up was performed in order to evaluate the determinants of 1-year survival. 590 patients with a mean age of 63 ± 14 years were included. Seventy-three (12.4%) patients were treated with ACE-I, 85 (14.4%) with ARBs and 62 (10.5%) with CCB. Cox regression analysis showed that male gender (OR: 1.4; 95% CI: from 1.02 to 2.07; P = 0.035), diabetes (OR: 1.6; 95% CI: from 1.03 to 2.7; P = 0.037), age (OR: 1.02; 95% CI: from 1.008 to 1.033; P = 0.001), and obesity (OR: 3.04; 95% CI: from 1.3 to 6.7; P < 0.001) were independently associated with a severe CT score. Of note, while prior outpatient therapy with ACE-I and ARBs was not independently associated with severe CT score, therapy with CCB was independently associated with a severe CT score (OR: 1.9, 95% CI: from 1.05 to 3.4, P = 0.033). Severe chest CT severity score (OR: 1.05; 95% CI: from 1.02 to 1.08; P < 0.001), P/F ratio (OR: 0.998; 95% CI: from 0.994 to 0.998; P < 0.001), and older age (OR: 1.06; 95% CI: from 1.03 to 1.1; P < 0.001) were independently associated with mortality at 1-year follow-up. Neither ACE-I, ARBs, and CCB were associated with mortality at 1 year follow-up.

Conclusions

ACE-I and ARBs do not influence the chest CT presentation of COVID-19 patients at the time of diagnosis. Furthermore, ACE-I and ARBs do not influence 1-year survival of COVID-19 survivors.

Long-term failure after endovascular aneurysm sealing in a real-life, single-center experience with the Nellix endograft

BACKGROUND

Endovascular aneurysm sealing (EVAS) is an innovative alternative to conventional endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). EVAS relies on sac anchoring without proximal fixation to achieve sealing and should have allowed for the treatment of a broader range of anatomic features compared with standard EVAR. Despite the encouraging early reports, the mid- and long-term follow-up data have shown increased rates of failure. To address the issue, the manufacturer introduced revised instructions for use (IFU) in 2016. The present study reports the outcomes of this system after a median follow-up of 45 months.

METHODS

Data for all patients electively treated with EVAS at our institution were retrospectively collected. The patients were retrospectively reclassified according to the 2016 revised IFU of the device. All patients in the present series had undergone EVAS for the treatment of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). The primary end point was therapeutic failure: graft migration >5 mm, sac expansion >5 mm, type IA endoleak (Is2 and Is3 using the Van den Ham classification), type Ib endoleak, and secondary rupture. The overall mortality, aortic-related mortality, and reintervention rates were also analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 101 patients had undergone elective treatment by EVAS from 2013 to 2018 for infrarenal AAAs. The median follow-up was 3.75 years. Therapeutic failure was observed in 31 of the 101 patients (30.7%), with no significant difference between the in-IFU and off-IFU 2016 subgroups. Failure occurred at a median interval of 34 months from the index procedure. Of the 101 patients, 6.9% had presented with secondary rupture. Freedom from aneurysm-related mortality was 96.9% at 1 and 2 years and 89.9% at 5 years. Freedom from reintervention decreased over time: 94.7% at 1 year, 77% at 4 years, and 52.1% at 6 years. Of the 101 patients, 14 (13.9%) had undergone emergent or elective graft explantation.

CONCLUSIONS

EVAS performed worse than conventional endografts for several critical end points, regardless of any preoperative anatomic parameters. The incidence of therapeutic failures tended to increase over time, especially 4 years after the index procedure.

Whole-body MRI with diffusion-weighted imaging: a valuable alternative to contrast-enhanced CT for initial staging of aggressive lymphoma

AIM

To compare the accuracy of whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (Wb-MRI) with diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) to that of contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CE-CT) and 2-[(18)F]-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose ((18)F-FDG) positron-emission tomography co-registered with low dose-CT (PET-CT) in defining lymphoma disease stage.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From February 2010 to May 2014, 41 lymphoma patients underwent Wb-MRI-DWI, CE-CT, and (18)F-FDG PET-CT. Histological subtypes included aggressive B-cell (n=11), follicular (n=13), mantle cell (n=3), and Hodgkin's (n=14) lymphoma. To compare the procedures, the reference standard (RS) assessment was defined by combining the results from (18)F-FDG PET-CT, CE-CT, and bone marrow (BM) histology, modifications after therapy, and histological re-assessments of uncertain lesions.

RESULTS

Among 1025 nodal sites, 217 had disease involvement according to the RS. CE-CT yielded 23 false-negative and 11 false-positive errors. Wb-MRI-DWI failed to recognise 17 localisations and had six false-positive errors; (18)F-FDG PET-CT had no errors. Among 458 extranodal sites, 37 were positive according to the RS. (18)F-FDG PET-CT yielded four false-negative and two false-positive results. CE-CT yielded 17 false-negative errors. Wb-MRI-DWI yielded a single false-negative error. Wb-MRI-DWI was the most reliable imaging technique for BM evaluation. Considering each procedure alone, the final stage would have been missed in four cases using (18)F-FDG PET-CT, 12 cases using CE-CT, and none using Wb-MRI-DWI.

CONCLUSION

The present data support Wb-MRI-DWI as a sensitive and specific imaging technique for lymphoma evaluation, supporting its use in place of CE-CT for staging.