Association of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers with risk of COVID-19, inflammation level, severity, and death in patients with COVID-19: A rapid systematic review and meta-analysis

Individual risk factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection during Alpha variant in high-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objectives

This study aimed to systematically appraise risk factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection in high-income countries during the period of predominance of the Alpha variant (January 2020 to April 2021).

Methods

Four electronic databases were used to search observational studies. Literature search, study screening, data extraction and quality assessment were conducted by two authors independently. Meta-analyses were conducted for each risk factor, when appropriate.

Results

From 12,094 studies, 27 were included. The larger sample size was 17,288,532 participants, more women were included, and the age range was 18-117 years old. Meta-analyses identified men [Odds Ratio (OR): 1.23, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 1.97-1.42], non-white ethnicity (OR: 1.63, 95% CI: 1.39-1.91), household number (OR: 1.08, 95% CI: 1.06-1.10), diabetes (OR: 1.22, 95% CI: 1.08-1.37), cancer (OR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.68-0.98), cardiovascular diseases (OR: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.84-1.00), asthma (OR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.75-0.92) and ischemic heart disease (OR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.74-0.91) as associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Conclusion

This study indicated several risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Due to the heterogeneity of the studies included, more studies are needed to understand the factors that increase the risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021244148, PROSPERO registration number, CRD42021244148.

Lisinopril increases lung ACE2 levels and SARS-CoV-2 viral load and decreases inflammation but not disease severity in experimental COVID-19

COVID-19 causes more severe and frequently fatal disease in patients with pre-existing comorbidities such as hypertension and heart disease. SARS-CoV-2 virus enters host cells through the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), which is fundamental in maintaining arterial pressure through the renin-angiotensin system (RAS). Hypertensive patients commonly use medications such as angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi), which can modulate the expression of ACE2 and, therefore, potentially impact the susceptibility and severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Here we assessed whether treatment of ACE2-humanized (K18-hACE2) mice with the ACEi Lisinopril affects lung ACE2 levels and the outcome of experimental COVID-19. K18-hACE2 mice were treated for 21 days with Lisinopril 10 mg/kg and were then infected with 105 PFU of SARS-CoV-2 (Wuhan strain). Body weight, clinical score, respiratory function, survival, lung ACE2 levels, viral load, lung histology, and cytokine (IL-6, IL-33, and TNF-α) levels were assessed. Mice treated with Lisinopril for 21 days showed increased levels of ACE2 in the lungs. Infection with SARS-CoV-2 led to massive decrease in lung ACE2 levels at 3 days post-infection (dpi) in treated and untreated animals, but Lisinopril-treated mice showed a fast recovery (5dpi) of ACE2 levels. Higher ACE2 levels in Lisinopril-treated mice led to remarkably higher lung viral loads at 3 and 6/7dpi. Lisinopril-treated mice showed decreased levels of the pro-inflammatory cytokines IL-6 and TNF-α in the serum and lungs at 6/7dpi. Marginal improvements in body weight, clinical score and survival were observed in Lisinopril-treated mice. No differences between treated and untreated infected mice were observed in respiratory function and lung histology. Lisinopril treatment showed both deleterious (higher viral loads) and beneficial (anti-inflammatory and probably anti-constrictory and anti-coagulant) effects in experimental COVID-19. These effects seem to compensate each other, resulting in marginal beneficial effects in terms of outcome for Lisinopril-treated animals.

RAAS inhibition and beyond-cardiovascular medications in patients at risk of or affected by COVID-19

The COVID-19 pandemic led to an enormous burden on healthcare systems worldwide. Causal therapy is still in its infancy. Contrary to initial views that the use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi)/angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) may increase the risk for a deleterious disease course, it has been shown that these agents may actually be beneficial for patients affected by COVID-19. In this article, we provide an overview of the three most commonly used classes of drugs in cardiovascular disease (ACEi/ARB, statins, beta-blockers) and their potential role in COVID-19 therapy. More results from randomized clinical trials are necessary to identify patients that can benefit most from the use of the respective drugs.

Potential use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors to reduce COVID-19 severity

SARS-CoV-2 infection and its clinical manifestations (COVID-19) quickly evolved to a pandemic and a global public health emergency. The limited effectivity of available treatments aimed at reducing virus replication and the lessons learned from other coronavirus infections (SARS-CoV-1 or NL63) that share the internalization process of SARS-CoV-2, led us to revisit the COVID-19 pathogenesis and potential treatments. Virus protein S binds to the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) initiating the internalization process. Endosome formation removes ACE2 from the cellular membrane preventing its counter-regulative effect mediated by the metabolism of angiotensin II to angiotensin (1-7). Internalized virus-ACE2 complexes have been identified for these coronaviruses. SARS-CoV-2 presents the highest affinity for ACE2 and produces the most severe symptoms. Assuming ACE2 internalization is the trigger for COVID-19 pathogenesis, accumulation of angiotensin II can be viewed as the potential cause of symptoms. Angiotensin II is a strong vasoconstrictor, but has also important roles in hypertrophy, inflammation, remodeling, and apoptosis. Higher levels of ACE2 in the lungs explain the acute respiratory distress syndrome as primary symptoms. Most of the described findings and clinical manifestations of COVID-19, including increased interleukin levels, endothelial inflammation, hypercoagulability, myocarditis, dysgeusia, inflammatory neuropathies, epileptic seizures and memory disorders can be explained by excessive angiotensin II levels. Several meta-analyses have demonstrated that previous use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers were associated with better prognosis for COVID-19. Therefore, pragmatic trials to assess the potential therapeutic benefits of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors should be urgently promoted by health authorities to widen the therapeutic options for COVID-19.

Atrial fibrillation and breast cancer—Vicious twins? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Epidemiological studies suggest a bidirectional association between atrial fibrillation and breast cancer. This study aimed to conduct a meta-analysis to elucidate the prevalence of atrial fibrillation among breast cancer patients, and the bidirectional association between atrial fibrillation and breast cancer.

Methods

PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase were searched to identify studies reporting the prevalence, incidence, and bidirectional association between atrial fibrillation and breast cancer. The study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022313251). Levels of evidence and recommendations were assessed by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).

Results

Twenty-three studies (17 retrospective cohort studies, 5 case-control studies and 1 cross-sectional study) involving 8,537,551 participants were included. Among patients with breast cancer, the prevalence of atrial fibrillation was 3% (11 studies; 95% CI: 0.6 to 7.1%) and the incidence was 2.7% (6 studies; 95% CI: 1.1 to 4.9%). Breast cancer was associated with increased risk of atrial fibrillation (5 studies; hazard ratio [HR]: 1.43, 95% CI: 1.12 to 1.82, I2 = 98%). Atrial fibrillation was also significantly associated elevated risk of breast cancer (5 studies HR: 1.18, 95% CI: 1.14 to 1.22, I2 = 0%). Grade assessment shown low certainty of the evidence for the risk of atrial fibrillation and moderate certainty of the evidence for the risk of breast cancer.

Conclusion

Atrial fibrillation is not uncommon in patients with breast cancer and vice versa. There is a bidirectional association between atrial fibrillation (low certainty) and breast cancer (moderate certainty).

Periodontal disease is associated with the risk of cardiovascular disease independent of sex: A meta-analysis

Objectives

Studies have established a link between periodontal disease and cardiovascular disease (CVD), but it is unclear whether there is a sex difference in their association.

Methods

The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched until June, 21 2022. Cardiovascular outcomes included any CVD, myocardial infarction (MI), coronary heart disease (CHD), or stroke. Studies reported the prevalence of CVD in patients with periodontal disease and the relationship between periodontal disease and CVD. The study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022333663). The level of evidence and recommendations is assessed by the Grading of Recommendations for Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).

Results

Twenty-six studies were included. In patients with periodontal disease, the prevalence of CVD was 7.2% [9 studies; 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.7-13.6%], and prevalence for CHD, hypertension, stroke, and heart failure was 6.6, 25.3, 1, and 1.1%, respectively. There was a significant association between periodontal disease and CVD in men [odds ratio (OR) = 1.22; 95% CI: 1.12-1.34] and women (OR = 1.11; 95% CI: 1.05-1.17), with no significant sex difference (P > 0.05).

Conclusion

Cardiovascular disease is relatively common in patients with periodontal disease, and an increased risk of CVD is associated with periodontal disease independent of sex. Interventions targeting periodontal disease may be beneficial for CVD.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42022333663.

An umbrella review and meta-analysis of renin-angiotensin system drugs use and COVID-19 outcomes

BACKGROUND

Despite the availability of extensive literature on the effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs)/angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs) on COVID-19 outcomes, the evidence is still controversial. We aimed to provide a comprehensive assessment of the effect of ACEIs/ARBs on COVID-19-related outcomes by summarising the currently available evidence.

METHODS

An umbrella review was conducted using Medline (OVID), Embase, Scopus, Cochrane library and medRxiv from inception to 1 February 2021. Systematic reviews with meta-analysis that evaluated the effect of ACEIs/ARBs on COVID-19-related clinical outcomes were eligible. Studies' quality was appraised using the AMSTAR 2 Critical Appraisal Tool. Data were analysed using the random-effects modelling including several subgroup analyses. Heterogenicity was assessed using I2 statistic. The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021233398) and reported using PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

Overall, 47 reviews were eligible for inclusion. Out of the nine COVID-19 outcomes evaluated, there was significant associations between ACEIs/ARBs use and each of death (OR = 0.80, 95%CI = 0.75-0.86; I2  = 51.9%), death/ICU admission as composite outcome (OR = 0.86, 95%CI = 0.80-0.92; I2  = 43.9%), severe COVID-19 (OR = 0.86, 95%CI = 0.78-0.95; I2  = 68%) and hospitalisation (OR = 1.23, 95%CI = 1.04-1.46; I2  = 76.4%). The significant reduction in death/ICU admission, however, was higher among studies which presented adjusted measure of effects (OR = 0.63, 95%CI = 0.47-0.84) and were of moderate quality (OR = 0.74, 95%CI = 0.63-0.85).

CONCLUSIONS

Collective evidence from observational studies indicate a good quality evidence on the significant association between ACEIs/ARBs use and reduction in death and death/ICU admission, but poor-quality evidence on both reducing severe COVID-19 and increasing hospitalisation. Our findings further support the current recommendations of not discontinuing ACEIs/ARBs therapy in patients with COVID-19.

Prevalence of NSAID use among people with COVID-19 and the association with COVID-19-related outcomes: Systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

Recent reports of potential harmful effects of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in treating patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have raised great concern.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and MedRxiv databases to examine the prevalence of NSAID use and associated COVID-19 risk, outcomes and safety.

RESULTS

Twenty-five studies with a total of 101 215 COVID-19 patients were included. Prevalence of NSAID use among COVID-19 patients was 19% (95% confidence interval [CI] 14-23%, no. of studies [n] = 22) and NSAID use prior to admission or diagnosis of COVID-19 was not associated with an increased risk of COVID-19 (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 0.93, 95% CI 0.82-1.06, I2  = 34%, n = 3), hospitalization (aOR = 1.06, 95% CI 0.76-1.48, I2  = 81%, n = 5), mechanical ventilation (aOR = 0.71, 95% CI 0.47-1.06, I2  = 38%, n = 4) or length of hospital stay. Moreover, prior use of NSAIDs was associated with a decreased risk of severe COVID-19 (aOR = 0.79, 95% CI 0.71-0.89, I2  = 0%, n = 7) and death (aOR = 0.68, 95% CI 0.52-0.89, I2  = 85%, n = 10). Prior NSAID administration might also be associated with an increased risk of stroke (aOR = 2.32, 95% CI 1.04-5.2, I2  = 0%, n = 2), but not myocardial infarction (aOR = 1.49, 95% CI 0.25-8.92, I2  = 0, n = 2) and composite thrombotic events (aOR = 1.56, 95% CI 0.66-3.69, I2  = 52%, n = 2).

CONCLUSION

Based on current evidence, NSAID use prior to admission or diagnosis of COVID-19 was not linked with increased odds or exacerbation of COVID-19. NSAIDs might provide a survival benefit, although they might potentially increase the risk of stroke. Controlled trials are still required to further assess the clinical benefit and safety (e.g., stroke and acute renal failure) of NSAIDs in treating patients with COVID-19.

Association of Renin Angiotensin Aldosterone System Inhibitors and Outcomes of Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19

OBJECTIVES

To determine the association of prior use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASIs) with mortality and outcomes in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

DESIGN

Retrospective observational study.

SETTING

Multicenter, international COVID-19 registry.

SUBJECTS

Adult hospitalized COVID-19 patients on antihypertensive agents (AHAs) prior to admission, admitted from March 31, 2020, to March 10, 2021.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Data were compared between three groups: patients on RAASIs only, other AHAs only, and those on both medications. Multivariable logistic and linear regressions were performed after controlling for prehospitalization characteristics to estimate the effect of RAASIs on mortality and other outcomes during hospitalization. Of 26,652 patients, 7,975 patients were on AHAs prior to hospitalization. Of these, 1,542 patients (19.3%) were on RAASIs only, 3,765 patients (47.2%) were on other AHAs only, and 2,668 (33.5%) patients were on both medications. Compared with those taking other AHAs only, patients on RAASIs only were younger (mean age 63.3 vs 66.9 yr; p < 0.0001), more often male (58.2% vs 52.4%; p = 0.0001) and more often White (55.1% vs 47.2%; p < 0.0001). After adjusting for age, gender, race, location, and comorbidities, patients on combination of RAASIs and other AHAs had higher in-hospital mortality than those on RAASIs only (odds ratio [OR] = 1.28; 95% CI [1.19-1.38]; p < 0.0001) and higher mortality than those on other AHAs only (OR = 1.09; 95% CI [1.03-1.15]; p = 0.0017). Patients on RAASIs only had lower mortality than those on other AHAs only (OR = 0.87; 95% CI [0.81-0.94]; p = 0.0003). Patients on ACEIs only had higher mortality compared with those on ARBs only (OR = 1.37; 95% CI [1.20-1.56]; p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients hospitalized for COVID-19 who were taking AHAs, prior use of a combination of RAASIs and other AHAs was associated with higher in-hospital mortality than the use of RAASIs alone. When compared with ARBs, ACEIs were associated with significantly higher mortality in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

Acute Kidney Injury in COVID-19 Patients: Pathogenesis, Clinical Characteristics, Therapy, and Mortality

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a disease caused by infection with the SARS-CoV-2 virus and has represented one of the greatest challenges humanity has faced in recent years. The virus can infect a large number of organs, including the lungs and upper respiratory tract, brain, liver, kidneys, and intestines, among many others. Although the greatest damage occurs in the lungs, the kidneys are not exempt, and acute kidney injury (AKI) can occur in patients with COVID-19. Indeed, AKI is one of the most frequent and serious organic complications of COVID-19. The incidence of COVID-19 AKI varies widely, and the exact mechanisms of how the virus damages the kidney are still unknown. For this reason, the purpose of this review was to assess current findings on the pathogenesis, clinical features, therapy, and mortality of COVID-19 AKI.

Relationship between serum growth differentiation factor 15, fibroblast growth factor-23 and risk of atrial fibrillation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and objective

Growth differentiation factor-15 (GDF-15) and fibroblast growth factor-23 (FGF-23) are considered predictors of the incidence of cardiovascular diseases. The present meta-analysis aimed to elucidate the associations between GDF-15 and FGF-23 in the risk of atrial fibrillation (AF).

Methods

An electronic search was conducted in the Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Embase databases from inception until February 27, 2021. The study protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42020182226).

Results

In total, 15 studies that enrolled 36,017 participants were included. Both serum FGF-23 and GDF-15 were elevated in patients with AF. Analysis of categorical variables showed higher serum FGF-23 levels were associated with an increased risk of AF [relative risk (RR) = 1.28, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.05–1.56]. In contrast, this association was not found with GDF-15 (RR = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.20–4.04). In dose-response analysis, a linear positive association was noted between serum FGF-23 levels and the risk of AF (P nonlinear = 0.9507), with a RR elevation of 7% for every 20 pg/ml increase in the serum FGF-23 levels (95% CI: 1.02–1.13). No remarkable relationship was found between serum GDF-15 levels and the risk of AF, and the overall RR for the association between a 100 ng/L increment in GDF-15 levels and AF was 1.01 (95% CI: 0.998–1.02).

Conclusion

Our study showed a positive linear correlation between serum FGF-23 levels and the risk of AF. However, no significant association was found between GDF-15 and the risk of AF. Further studies are warranted to clarify whether serum FGF-23 levels may be considered in predicting the risk of AF.

Systematic Review Registration:http:www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd, identifier CRD42020182226.

Association of outpatient use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blockers on outcomes of acute respiratory illness during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cohort study

OBJECTIVES

Evaluate the associations between patients taking ACE inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and their clinical outcomes after an acute viral respiratory illness (AVRI) due to COVID-19.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort.

SETTING

The USA; 2017-2018 influenza season, 2018-2019 influenza season, and 2019-2020 influenza/COVID-19 season.

PARTICIPANTS

People with hypertension (HTN) taking an ACEi, ARB or other HTN medications, and experiencing AVRI.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Change in hospital admission, intensive care unit (ICU) or coronary care unit (CCU), acute respiratory distress (ARD), ARD syndrome (ARDS) and all-cause mortality, comparing COVID-19 to pre-COVID-19 influenza seasons.

RESULTS

The cohort included 1 059 474 episodes of AVRI (653 797 filled an ACEi or ARB, and 405 677 other HTN medications). 58.6% were women and 72.9% with age ≥65. The ACEi/ARB cohort saw a larger increase in risk in the COVID-19 influenza season than the other HTN medication cohort for four out of five outcomes, with an additional 1.5 percentage point (pp) increase in risk of an inpatient stay (95% CI 1.2 to 1.9 pp) and of ICU/CCU use (95% CI 0.3 to 2.7 pp) as well as a 0.7 pp (0.1 to 1.2 pp) additional increase in risk of ARD and 0.9 pp (0.4 to 1.3 pp) additional increase in risk of ARDS. There was no statistically significant difference in the absolute risk of death (-0.2 pp, 95% CI -0.4 to 0.1 pp). However, the relative risk of death in 2019/2020 versus 2017/2018 for the ACEi/ARB group was larger (1.40 (1.36 to 1.44)) than for the other HTN medication cohort (1.24 (1.21 to 1.28)).

CONCLUSIONS

People with AVRI using ACEi/ARBs for HTN had a greater increase in poor outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic than those using other medications to treat HTN. The small absolute magnitude of the differences likely does not support changes in clinical practice.

Renin-Angiotensin Aldosterone System Inhibitors and COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Revealing Critical Bias Across a Body of Observational Research

Background Renin-angiotensin aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitor-COVID-19 studies, observational in design, appear to use biased methods that can distort the interaction between RAAS inhibitor use and COVID-19 risk. This study assessed the extent of bias in that research and reevaluated RAAS inhibitor-COVID-19 associations in studies without critical risk of bias. Methods and Results Searches were performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases (December 1, 2019 to October 21, 2021) identifying studies that compared the risk of infection and/or severe COVID-19 outcomes between those using or not using RAAS inhibitors (ie, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II type-I receptor blockers). Weighted hazard ratios (HR) and 95% CIs were extracted and pooled in fixed-effects meta-analyses, only from studies without critical risk of bias that assessed severe COVID-19 outcomes. Of 169 relevant studies, 164 had critical risks of bias and were excluded. Ultimately, only two studies presented data relevant to the meta-analysis. In 1 351 633 people with uncomplicated hypertension using a RAAS inhibitor, calcium channel blocker, or thiazide diuretic in monotherapy, the risk of hospitalization (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor: HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.66-0.87; P<0.001; angiotensin II type-I receptor blockers: HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.77-0.97; P=0.015) and intubation or death (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor: HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.48-0.85; P=0.002; angiotensin II type-I receptor blockers: HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.58-0.95; P=0.019) with COVID-19 was lower in those using a RAAS inhibitor. However, these protective effects are probably not clinically relevant. Conclusions This study reveals the critical risk of bias that exists across almost an entire body of COVID-19 research, raising an important question: Were research methods and/or peer-review processes temporarily weakened during the surge of COVID-19 research or is this lack of rigor a systemic problem that also exists outside pandemic-based research? Registration URL: www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/; Unique identifier: CRD42021237859.

Association of statin and/or renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system modulating therapy with mortality in adults with diabetes admitted to hospital with COVID-19: A retrospective multicentre European study

BACKGROUND & AIMS

To assess the impact of pre-admission renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitor (RAASi) and statin use on mortality following COVID-19 hospitalization in adults with pre-existing diabetes.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of adults with diabetes admitted to ninety-nine participating hospitals in the United Kingdom, France and Spain during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Logistic regression models adjusted for demographic factors and comorbidity were used to describe associations with mortality in hospital or within 28 days of admission and individual or combined RAASi and statin therapy prescription followed by a country level meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Complete data were available for 3474 (42.6%) individuals. Prescribing patterns varied by country: 25-50% neither RAASi nor statin therapy, 14-36% both RAASi and statin therapy, 9-24% RAASi therapy alone, 12-36% statin alone. Overall, 20-37% of patients died within 28 days. Meta-analysis found no evidence of an association between mortality and prescription of RAASi therapy (OR 1.09, CI 0.78-1.52 (I² 22.2%)), statin (OR 0.97, CI 0.59-1.61 (I² 72.9%)) or both (OR 1.14, CI 0.67-1.92 (I² 78.3%)) compared to those prescribed neither drug class.

CONCLUSIONS

This large multicentre, multinational study found no evidence of an association between mortality from COVID-19 infection in people with diabetes and use of either RAASi, statin or combination therapy. This provides reassurance that clinicians should not change their RAASi and statin therapy prescribing practice in people with diabetes during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Role of the renin-angiotensin system in NETosis in the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)

Myocardial infarction and stroke are the leading causes of death in the world. Numerous evidence has confirmed that hypertension promotes thrombosis and induces myocardial infarction and stroke. Recent findings reveal that neutrophil extracellular traps (NETs) are involved in the induction of myocardial infarction and stroke. Meanwhile, patients with severe COVID-19 suffer from complications such as myocardial infarction and stroke with pathological signs of NETs. Due to the extremely low amount of virus detected in the blood and remote organs (e.g., heart, brain and kidney) in a few cases, it is difficult to explain the mechanism by which the virus triggers NETosis, and there may be a different mechanism than in the lung. A large number of studies have found that the renin-angiotensin system regulates the NETosis at multiple levels in patients with COVID-19, such as endocytosis of SARS-COV-2, abnormal angiotensin II levels, neutrophil activation and procoagulant function at multiple levels, which may contribute to the formation of reticular structure and thrombosis. The treatment of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI), angiotensin II type 1 receptor blockers (ARBs) and neutrophil recruitment and active antagonists helps to regulate blood pressure and reduce the risk of net and thrombosis. The review will explore the possible role of the angiotensin system in the formation of NETs in severe COVID-19.

Stem cell therapy for COVID-19 pneumonia

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus is a highly contagious microorganism, and despite substantial investigation, no progress has been achieved in treating post-COVID complications. However, the virus has made various mutations and has spread around the world. Researchers have tried different treatments to reduce the side effects of the COVID-19 symptoms. One of the most common and effective treatments now used is steroid therapy to reduce the complications of this disease. Long-term steroid therapy for chronic inflammation following COVID-19 is harmful and increases the risk of secondary infection, and effective treatment remains challenging owing to fibrosis and severe inflammation and infection. Sometimes our immune system can severely damage ourselves in disease. In the past, many researchers have conducted various studies on the immunomodulatory properties of stem cells. This property of stem cells led them to modulate the immune system of autoimmune diseases like diabetes, multiple sclerosis, and Parkinson's. Because of their immunomodulatory properties, stem cell-based therapy employing mesenchymal or hematopoietic stem cells may be a viable alternative treatment option in some patients. By priming the immune system and providing cytokines, chemokines, and growth factors, stem cells can be employed to build a long-term regenerative and protective response. This review addresses the latest trends and rapid progress in stem cell treatment for Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) following COVID-19.

Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor and Angiotensin Receptor Blocker Use Associated with Reduced Mortality and Other Disease Outcomes in US Veterans with COVID-19

Objective

To determine the association between angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) use and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) severity and outcomes in US veterans.

Patients and Methods

We retrospectively examined 27,556 adult US veterans who tested positive for COVID-19 between March to November 2020. Logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards models using propensity score (PS) for weight, adjustment, and matching were used to examine the odds of an event within 60 days following a COVID-19–positive case date and time to death, respectively, according to ACEI and/or ARB prescription within 6 months prior to the COVID-19–positive case date.

Results

The overlap PS weighted logistic regression model showed lower odds of an intensive care unit (ICU) admission (odds ratio [OR] 95% CI 0.77, 0.61–0.98) and death within 60 days (0.87, 0.79–0.97) with an ACEI or ARB prescription. Veterans with an ARB-only prescription also had lower odds of an ICU admission (0.64, 0.44–0.92). The overlap PS weighted model similarly showed a lower risk of time to all-cause mortality in veterans with an ACEI or ARB prescription (HR [95% CI]: 0.87, 0.79–0.97) and an ARB only prescription (0.78, 0.67–0.91). Veterans with an ACEI prescription had higher odds of experiencing a septic event within 60 days after the COVID-19–positive case date (1.22, 1.02–1.46).

Conclusion

In this study of a national cohort of US veterans, we found that the use of an ACEI/ARB in patients with COVID-19 was not associated with increased mortality and other worse outcomes. Future studies should examine underlying pathways and further confirm the relationship of ACEI prescription with sepsis.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40265-021-01639-2.

Hypertension and its management in COVID-19 patients: The assorted view

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is suspected to mainly be more deleterious in patients with underlying cardiovascular diseases (CVD). There is a strong association between hypertension and COVID-19 severity. The binding of SARS-CoV-2 to the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) leads to deregulation of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) through down-regulation of ACE2 with subsequent increment of the harmful Ang II serum levels and reduction of the protective Ang-(1-7). Both angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) are commonly used to manage hypertension.

OBJECTIVE

Objective was to illustrate the potential link between hypertension and COVID-19 regarding the role of angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) in hypertensive patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

We carried out comprehensive databases search from late December 2019 to early January 2021 by using online engines of Web of Science, Research gate, Scopus, Google Scholar, and PubMed for published and preprinted articles.

RESULTS

The present study's findings showed that hypertension is regarded as an independent risk factor for COVID-19 severity. Both ACEIs and ARBs are beneficial in managing hypertensive patients.

CONCLUSION

This study concluded that hypertension increases COVID-19 severity due to underlying endothelial dysfunctions and coagulopathy. COVID-19 might augment the hypertensive complications due to down-regulation of ACE2. The use of ACEIs or ARBs might be beneficial in the management of hypertensive patients with COVID-19.

Prevalence of Atrial Fibrillation and Associated Mortality Among Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Epidemiological studies have shown that atrial fibrillation (AF) is a potential cardiovascular complication of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to clarify the prevalence and clinical impact of AF and new-onset AF in patients with COVID-19. Methods: PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and MedRxiv up to February 27, 2021, were searched to identify studies that reported the prevalence and clinical impact of AF and new-onset AF in patients with COVID-19. The study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021238423). Results: Nineteen eligible studies were included with a total of 21,653 hospitalized patients. The pooled prevalence of AF was 11% in patients with COVID-19. Older (≥60 years of age) patients with COVID-19 had a nearly 2.5-fold higher prevalence of AF than younger (<60 years of age) patients with COVID-19 (13 vs. 5%). Europeans had the highest prevalence of AF (15%), followed by Americans (11%), Asians (6%), and Africans (2%). The prevalence of AF in patients with severe COVID-19 was 6-fold higher than in patients with non-severe COVID-19 (19 vs. 3%). Furthermore, AF (OR: 2.98, 95% CI: 1.91 to 4.66) and new-onset AF (OR: 2.32, 95% CI: 1.60 to 3.37) were significantly associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality among patients with COVID-19. Conclusion: AF is quite common among hospitalized patients with COVID-19, particularly among older (≥60 years of age) patients with COVID-19 and patients with severe COVID-19. Moreover, AF and new-onset AF were independently associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality among hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

Pathophysiology of COVID-19-associated acute kidney injury

Although respiratory failure and hypoxaemia are the main manifestations of COVID-19, kidney involvement is also common. Available evidence supports a number of potential pathophysiological pathways through which acute kidney injury (AKI) can develop in the context of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Histopathological findings have highlighted both similarities and differences between AKI in patients with COVID-19 and in those with AKI in non-COVID-related sepsis. Acute tubular injury is common, although it is often mild, despite markedly reduced kidney function. Systemic haemodynamic instability very likely contributes to tubular injury. Despite descriptions of COVID-19 as a cytokine storm syndrome, levels of circulating cytokines are often lower in patients with COVID-19 than in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome with causes other than COVID-19. Tissue inflammation and local immune cell infiltration have been repeatedly observed and might have a critical role in kidney injury, as might endothelial injury and microvascular thrombi. Findings of high viral load in patients who have died with AKI suggest a contribution of viral invasion in the kidneys, although the issue of renal tropism remains controversial. An impaired type I interferon response has also been reported in patients with severe COVID-19. In light of these observations, the potential pathophysiological mechanisms of COVID-19-associated AKI may provide insights into therapeutic strategies.

Integrating heterogeneous data to facilitate COVID-19 drug repurposing

In the COVID-19 pandemic, drug repositioning has presented itself as an alternative to the time-consuming process of generating new drugs. This review describes a drug repurposing process that is based on a new data-driven approach: we put forward five information paths that associate COVID-19-related genes and COVID-19 symptoms with drugs that directly target these gene products, that target the symptoms or that treat diseases that are symptomatically or genetically similar to COVID-19. The intersection of the five information paths results in a list of 13 drugs that we suggest as potential candidates against COVID-19. In addition, we have found information in published studies and in clinical trials that support the therapeutic potential of the drugs in our final list.

Sex-Specific Exposure-Effect Relationship Between Physical Activity and Incident Atrial Fibrillation in the General Population: A Dose-Response Meta-Analysis of 16 Prospective Studies

Background: Since evidence regarding the relationship between physical activity (PA) and atrial fibrillation (AF) incidence is inconsistent among studies, we performed a dose-response meta-analysis to comprehensively evaluate the exposure-effect association between PA and incident AF and the potential sex difference in the general population. Methods: The PubMed and Embase databases were searched for eligible studies published up to July 2020 (PROSPERO: CRD42018091692). The non-linear or linear exposure-effect relationship between PA and AF was examined using the robust error meta-regression method. Results: A total of 16 prospective studies involving 1,449,017 individuals and 39,884 AF cases were included. We observed an inverse non-linear association between PA level and incident AF (I ² = 0%, p _{non-linearity} < 0.001). In the linear model, a 5 metabolic equivalent of task (MET)-h/week increase in PA was associated with a decreased risk of AF [risk ratio (RR) = 0.992, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.988-0.996, I ² = 0%]. In the sex-stratified analysis, we observed an inverse non-linear relationship between PA level and AF risk in females (I ² = 90%, p _{non-linearity} < 0.0001) but not in males (I ² = 0%, p _{non-linearity} = 0.40). In the linear model, a 5 MET-h/week increase in PA was associated with a reduced risk of AF in females (RR = 0.982, 95% CI: 0.975-0.989, I ² = 71%) but not in males (RR = 0.998, 95% CI: 0.994-1.002, I ² = 0%), with a significant interaction observed between the two groups (p _interaction < 0.0001). Conclusion: There was an inverse non-linear relationship between PA level and incident AF in the general population. The beneficial effect of PA in reducing AF risk might be predominantly observed in females.

Similarities between COVID-19 and systemic sclerosis early vasculopathy: A "viral" challenge for future research in scleroderma

OBJECTIVE

To review similarities between COVID-19 and systemic sclerosis (SSc) early vasculopathy to provide novel insights into both diseases.

METHODS

A narrative review of the literature supplemented with expert opinion.

RESULTS

There is clear evidence that the endothelium is at the centre stage in SSc and COVID-19, with endothelial cell activation/injury and dysfunction creating the crucial evolving step in the pathogenesis of both diseases. The angiotensin system has also been implicated in the early stages of both COVID-19 and SSc. Autoptic studies provide novel insights into the effects of SARS-CoV-2 on the endothelium. Normal endothelium and endothelial dysfunction in COVID-19 and SSc are discussed. It is debated whether SARS-CoV-2 infection triggers autoimmunity with production of autoantibodies which is of mechanistic interest because other viral illnesses are potentially involved in endothelial dysfunction and in SSc pathogenesis.

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 is due to a direct assault of SARS-CoV-2 on the vascular system as an acute infection, whereas SSc remains a chronic/sub-acute autoimmune disease of largely unknown etiology Further study and exploration of the SARS-CoV-2 pathogenic mechanisms might provide further useful milestones in the understanding of the early SSc pathogenesis.

Influence of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers on the risk of all-cause mortality and other clinical outcomes in patients with confirmed COVID-19: A systemic review and meta-analysis

Since the COVID-19 pandemic, physicians concerned about the potential adverse effects of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs)/angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs). To explore the relationship between ACEIs/ARBs and the risk of mortality and other clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients, the authors conducted a systemic review and meta-analysis. An electronic search was performed from inception to November 12, 2020 in PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials, TRIP, the Cochrane Library, CNKI, Wanfang, and CBM database. Risk of bias was assessed using the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions tool. The primary outcome was in-hospital all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality measured at 30-day or longer term, mechanical ventilation, length of hospital stay, readmission, and cardiac adverse events. A total of 28 studies with 73 465 patients was included. Twenty-two studies with 19 871 patients reported the incidence of all-cause mortality. Results showed no association between using ACEIs/ARBs and risk of mortality crude odds ratio （OR） of 1.02, 95% CI 0.71-1.46, p = .90, I2  = 88%, adjusted OR in 6260 patients of 0.96, 95% CI 0.77-1.18, p = .68, I2  = 0%. While six studies with 10 030 patients reported a lower risk of mortality in ACEIs/ARBs group hazard ratio (HR) of 0.53, 95% CI 0.34-0.84, p = .007, I2  = 68%. Similar association (for HR) was found in hypertension subgroup. There was no significant association for the secondary outcomes. Based on the available data, we concluded that ACEIs/ARBs is not associated with the risk of in-hospital all-cause mortality in COVID-19 patients, but may be associated with a decreased risk of 30-day all-cause mortality. Patients with hypertension may benefit from using ACEIs/ARBs.

Adverse Cardiovascular Effects of Anti-COVID-19 Drugs

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) or COVID-19 infection is the cause of the ongoing global pandemic. Mortality from COVID-19 infection is particularly high in patients with cardiovascular diseases. In addition, COVID-19 patients with preexisting cardiovascular comorbidities have a higher risk of death. Main cardiovascular complications of COVID-19 are myocardial infarction, myocarditis, acute myocardial injury, arrhythmias, heart failure, stroke, and venous thromboembolism. Therapeutic interventions in terms of drugs for COVID-19 have many cardiac adverse effects. Here, we review the relative therapeutic efficacy and adverse effects of anti-COVID-19 drugs.

Angiotensin Receptor Blockers and Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors in COVID-19: Meta-analysis/Meta-regression Adjusted for Confounding Factors

BACKGROUND

Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and/or angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors could alter mortality from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but existing meta-analyses that combined crude and adjusted results may be confounded by the fact that comorbidities are more common in ARB/ACE inhibitor users.

METHODS

We searched PubMed/MEDLINE/Embase for cohort studies and meta-analyses reporting mortality by preexisting ARB/ACE inhibitor treatment in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Random effects meta-regression was used to compute pooled odds ratios for mortality adjusted for imbalance in age, sex, and prevalence of cardiovascular disease, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and chronic kidney disease between users and nonusers of ARBs/ACE inhibitors at the study level during data synthesis.

RESULTS

In 30 included studies of 17,281 patients, 22%, 68%, 25%, and 11% had cardiovascular disease, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and chronic kidney disease. ARB/ACE inhibitor use was associated with significantly lower mortality after controlling for potential confounding factors (odds ratio 0.77 [95% confidence interval: 0.62, 0.96]). In contrast, meta-analysis of ARB/ACE inhibitor use was not significantly associated with mortality when all studies were combined with no adjustment made for confounders (0.87 [95% confidence interval: 0.71, 1.08]).

CONCLUSIONS

ARB/ACE inhibitor use was associated with decreased mortality in cohorts of COVID-19 patients after adjusting for age, sex, cardiovascular disease, hypertension, diabetes, and chronic kidney disease. Unadjusted meta-analyses may not be appropriate for determining whether ARBs/ACE inhibitors are associated with mortality from COVID-19 because of indication bias.

Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System Inhibitors in COVID-19: A Review

Among the multiple uncertainties surrounding the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, a research letter published in The Lancet implicated drugs that antagonize the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) in an unfavorable prognosis of COVID-19. This report prompted investigations to identify mechanisms by which blocking angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) could lead to serious consequences in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The possible association between RAAS inhibitors use and unfavorable prognosis in this disease may have been biased by the presence of underlying cardiovascular diseases. As the number of COVID-19 cases has increased worldwide, it has now become possible to investigate the association between RAAS inhibitors and unfavorable prognosis in larger cohorts. Observational studies and one randomized clinical trial failed to identify any consistent association between the use of these drugs and unfavorable prognosis in COVID-19. In view of the accumulated clinical evidence, several scientific societies recommend that treatment with RAAS inhibitors should not be discontinued in patients diagnosed with COVID-19 (unless contraindicated). This recommendation should be followed by clinicians and patients.

Outcomes of Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients Receiving Renin Angiotensin System Blockers and Calcium Channel Blockers

INTRODUCTION

Use of certain antihypertensive medications has been an area of interest during the COVID-19 pandemic, and several hypotheses have been developed regarding the effects of renin-angiotensin system blockers as well as calcium channel blockers in those infected with COVID-19. We seek to determine the association between exposure to ACEI, ARB, and CCB and outcomes in those admitted to the hospital with COVID-19 infection.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included 841 adult patients hospitalized with COVID-19 infection at the University of Chicago Medical Center between March 25 and June 22, 2020. Out of these 841, 453 patients had a personal history of hypertension. For the first part, we evaluated primary outcomes of in-hospital mortality and ICU admission in hospitalized COVID-19 patients based on their exposure to particular medications regardless of a personal history of hypertension and compared them with those who were not on these medications. For the second part, we evaluated the aforementioned outcomes in 453 patients with a personal history of hypertension based on their medication exposure. Secondary outcomes of length of stay, readmission rate, and new-onset dialysis requirement were also compared across the study groups.

RESULTS

Out of 841 patients, 111 (13.19%) were on ACEI/ARB (median age: 66.1, SD 15.4; 52.25% females) and 730 (86.80%) were not on them (median age: 56.6, SD 20.3; 50.14% females), while 277 (32.93%) used CCB (median age: 64.6, SD 15.2; 57.04% females) and 564 (67.06%) did not use CCB (median age: 54.6, SD 21.2; 47.16% females). After adjusting for demographics and covariates, neither ACEI/ARB nor CCB exposure was associated with any effect on mortality, but ACEI/ARB exposure was associated with 42% reduction in risk of ICU admissions (OR 0.58, 95% CI [0.35, 0.95], p value 0.03). In addition, combined use of ACEI/ARB and CCB was associated with statistically significant (45%) reduction in ICU admission (OR 0.55, 95% CI [0.32, 0.94], p value 0.029). Out of 453 patients with a personal history of hypertension, 85 (18.76%) were taking ACEI/ARB (median age 65, SD 15.6; 56.47% females) and 368 (81.24%) were not on ACEI/ARB (median age 62.8, SD 16.4; 54.89% females), while 208 (45.92%) out of 453 were on CCB (median age 65; SD 14.8; 60.1% females) and 245 (54.08%) were not on CCB (median age 61.7, SD 17.3; 51.02% females). In the fully adjusted model in this group, ACEI use was associated with 71% reduction in in-house mortality (OR 0.29, 95% CI [0.09, 0.93], p value 0.03).

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION

Among all hospitalized patients with COVID-19 infection, exposure to ACEI/ARB, as well as combined exposure to ACEI/ARB and CCB, were associated with reduced incidence of ICU admissions. In those admitted patients who had a personal history of hypertension, there was a trend towards reduced in-hospital mortality in those exposed to ACEI.

Antihypertensives and their relation to mortality by SARS-CoV-2 infection

The role of antihypertensives, especially Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System inhibitors, is still debatable in COVID-19-related severity and outcome. Therefore, we search for a more global analysis of antihypertensive medication in relation to SAS-CoV-2 severity using prescription data worldwide. The association between the percentage use of different types of antihypertensive medications and mortality rates due to a SARS-CoV-2 infection during the first 3 weeks of the pandemic was analyzed using random effects linear regression models for 30 countries worldwide. Higher percentages of prescribed angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) (β, 95% confidence interval [CI]; -0.02 [-0.04 to -0.0012]; p = .042) and calcium channel blockers (CCBs) (β, 95% CI; -0.023 [-0.05 to -0.0028]; p = .0304) were associated with a lower first 3-week SARS-CoV-2-related death rate, whereas a higher percentage of prescribed angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEis) (β, 95% CI; 0.03 [0.0061-0.05]; p = .0103) was associated with a higher first 3-week death rate, even when adjusted for age and metformin use. There was no association between the amount of prescribed beta-blockers (BBs) and diuretics (Diu) and the first 3-week death rate. When analyzing the combination of drugs that is used by at least 50% of antihypertensive users, within the different countries, countries with the lowest first 3-week death rates had at least an angiotensin receptor blocker as one of the most often prescribed antihypertensive medications (ARBs/CCBs: [β, 95% CI; -0.02 [-0.03 to -0.004]; p = .009], ARBs/BBs: [β, 95% CI; -0.03 [-0.05 to -0.006]; p = .01]). Finally, countries prescribing high-potency ARBs had lower first 3-week ARBs. In conclusion, ARBs and CCB seem to have a protective effect against death from SARS-CoV-2 infection.

The association of COVID-19 occurrence and severity with the use of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin-II receptor blockers in patients with hypertension

BACKGROUND

A number of studies have reported the association between the use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) and angiotensin-II receptor blocker (ARB) medications and the occurrence or severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Published results are inconclusive, possibly due to differences in participant comorbidities and sociodemographic backgrounds. Since ACEI and ARB are frequently used anti-hypertension medications, we aim to determine whether the use of ACEI and ARB is associated with the occurrence and severity of COVID-19 in a large study of US Veterans with hypertension.

METHODS

Data were collected from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) National Corporate Data Warehouse (VA-COVID-19 Shared Data Resource) between February 28, 2020 and August 18, 2020. Using data from 228,722 Veterans with a history of hypertension who received COVID-19 testing at the VA, we investigated whether the use of ACEI or ARB over the two years prior to the index date was associated with increased odds of (1) a positive COVID-19 test, and (2) a severe outcome (hospitalization, mortality, and use of intensive care unit (ICU) and/or mechanical ventilation) among COVID-19-positive patients. We used logistic regression with and without propensity score weighting (PSW) to estimate the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) for the association between ACEI/ARB use and a positive COVID-19 test result. The association between medication use and COVID-19 outcome severity was examined using multinomial logistic regression comparing participants who were not hospitalized to participants who were hospitalized, were admitted to the ICU, used a mechanical ventilator, or died. All models were adjusted for relevant covariates, including demographics (age, sex, race, ethnicity), selected comorbidities, and the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI).

RESULTS

The use of ACEI significantly decreased the odds of a positive COVID-19 test among Veterans with hypertension (OR = 0.917, (0.887, 0.948) and OR = 0.926, (0.894, 0.958) with PSW). The use of ACEI, but not of ARB, was also associated with significantly increased odds of using mechanical ventilators (OR = 1.265, (1.010, 1.584) and OR = 1.210, (1.053, 1.39) with PSW) among all COVID-19 inpatients compared to outpatients.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study of Veterans with hypertension, ACEI was significantly associated with decreased odds of testing positive for COVID-19. With the exception of the association of ACEI with a small non-clinically-important increase in the odds of using mechanical ventilators, neither ACEI nor ARB was found to be associated with clinical severity or mortality among COVID-19-positive Veterans. The results of this study need further corroboration and validation in other cohort samples outside the VA.

The Effect of Chronic and Inhospital Exposure to Renin-Angiotensin System Inhibitors on the Outcome and Inflammatory State of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Adult Inpatients

Background

Controversies exist about the effect of renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi) on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcome. The inhospital use of RASi and its effect on inflammatory sate are still poorly studied during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Objectives

We aimed to compare the impact of previous and inhospital RASi exposure on the outcome and inflammatory response of COVID-19 patients.

Methods

Single-centre, ambispective analysis of hospitalized adult COVID-19 patients at Hospital de Santa Maria, Lisbon, between March and August 2020 was performed. We excluded asymptomatic patients and those admitted due to another disease. The primary outcome was inhospital all-cause mortality. Illness severity was assessed based on the development of acute respiratory distress syndrome/acute lung injury (ARDS/ALI), intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and need for invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). We used C-reactive protein (CRP), ferritin, and interleukin 6 (IL-6) as surrogate markers of the inflammatory response.

Results

From a total of 432 patients, 279 were selected, among whom 133 (47.7%) were receiving a RASi. Chronic treatment with RASi was not associated with the risk of death (OR 1.24, 95% CI 0.66–2.31, p=0.500), ARDS/ALI development (OR 1.12, 95% CI 0.67–1.86, p=0.676), ICU admission (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.67–1.84, p = 0.686), and IMV need (OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.58–1.84, p=0.917) in a univariable and multivariable analysis. Inhospital RASi withdrawing was associated with the risk of death (OR 4.38, 95% CI 1.11–17.21, p=0.035) and ARDS/ALI development (OR 4.33, 95% CI 1.49–12.6, p=0.007), the latter remaining significant after adjustment. Previous exposure to RASi was associated with lower CRP levels at admission (p=0.018). IL-6 levels were significantly higher in those patients whose RASi were stopped (p=0.024).

Conclusion

Previous and inhospital exposure to RASi was not associated with mortality nor severity of COVID-19. This study supports current guidance on RASi management during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Effects of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors and Angiotensin Receptor Blockers on Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2 Levels: A Comprehensive Analysis Based on Animal Studies

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the pathogen of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused the outbreak escalated to pandemic. Reports suggested that near 1-3% of COVID-19 cases have a fatal outcome. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are widely used in hypertension, heart failure and chronic kidney disease. These drugs have been reported to upregulate angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) which produces Ang (1-7), the main counter-regulatory mediator of angiotensin II. This enzyme is also known as the receptor of SARS-CoV-2 promoting the cellular uptake of the virus in the airways, however, ACE2 itself proved to be protective in several experimental models of lung injury. The present study aimed to systematically review the relationship between ACEI/ARB administration and ACE2 expression in experimental models. After a comprehensive search and selection, 27 animal studies investigating ACE2 expression in the context of ACEI and ARB were identified. The majority of these papers reported increased ACE2 levels in response to ACEI/ARB treatment. This result should be interpreted in the light of the dual role of ACE2 being a promoter of viral entry to cells and a protective factor against oxidative damage in the lungs.

Clinical Features and Prognostic Factors of 245 Portuguese Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19

Introduction Since the declaration of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic in March 2020, Portugal was considered a role model with regards to the first COVID-19 wave. However, a third wave started in 2021 started, turning the country into the worst in the world regarding new infections and death rate per capita in the last weeks of January 2021. No significant data regarding the country's first wave of hospitalized patients have been published. Those data may help understand the differences over time regarding patients and the clinical approach to them. Herein, we present data of COVID-19 patients hospitalized at the main tertiary hospital of the second-most affected county at the time and identify risk factors associated with disease progression and outcomes. Materials and methods We performed a prospective observational study of patients admitted with COVID-19 to a central hospital between March 20 and June 1, 2020. The primary endpoint of this study was 30-day mortality or the need for ventilatory support and the secondary outcomes were both outcomes individually. Results 245 patients were included, with a median age of 79 years, 52% males. Hypertension (n = 172) and dyslipidemia (n = 114) were the most frequent comorbidities. Half of the patients (n = 121) were treated with hydroxychloroquine. The primary outcome occurred in 114 patients; mortality at 30 days was 35%. Age (OR 1.05; 1.02-1.07) and active cancer (OR 3.89; 1.43-10.57) were associated with the primary outcome, with dyslipidemia being protective (OR 0.46; 0.25-0.80). Treatment with hydroxychloroquine or lopinavir/ritonavir was not associated with the main outcome. Patients who had been symptomatic for more than 7 days had lower mortality (OR 0.23; 0.09-0.63). Discussion In the present study, age and cancer were associated with higher mortality, as noted in prior articles. The population had a higher median age than reported in previous studies, which may explain the increased mortality. The protective association of dyslipidemia was not previously described. This association was not related to statin intake. Conclusion The reported high mortality of COVID-19 is rarely seen in other infectious diseases. Our elderly population probably reflects more reliably the incidence of COVID-19 in European countries with constricted age pyramids.

The neuropsychiatric manifestations of COVID-19: Interactions with psychiatric illness and pharmacological treatment

The recent outbreak of the corona virus disease (COVID-19) has had major global impact. The relationship between severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) infection and psychiatric diseases is of great concern, with an evident link between corona virus infections and various central and peripheral nervous system manifestations. Unmitigated neuro-inflammation has been noted to underlie not only the severe respiratory complications of the disease but is also present in a range of neuro-psychiatric illnesses. Several neurological and psychiatric disorders are characterized by immune-inflammatory states, while treatments for these disorders have distinct anti-inflammatory properties and effects. With inflammation being a common contributing factor in SARS-CoV-2, as well as psychiatric disorders, treatment of either condition may affect disease progression of the other or alter response to pharmacological treatment. In this review, we elucidate how viral infections could affect pre-existing psychiatric conditions and how pharmacological treatments of these conditions may affect overall progress and outcome in the treatment of SARS-CoV-2. We address whether any treatment-induced benefits and potential adverse effects may ultimately affect the overall treatment approach, considering the underlying dysregulated neuro-inflammatory processes and potential drug interactions. Finally, we suggest adjunctive treatment options for SARS-CoV-2-associated neuro-psychiatric symptoms.

Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2: from a vasoactive peptide to the gatekeeper of a global pandemic

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We provide a comprehensive overview of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) as a possible candidate for pharmacological approaches to halt inflammatory processes in different pathogenic conditions.

RECENT FINDINGS

ACE2 has quickly gained prominence in basic research as it has been identified as the main entry receptor for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). This novel pathogen causes Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), a pathogenic condition that reached pandemic proportion and is associated with unprecedented morbidity and mortality.

SUMMARY

The renin-angiotensin system is a complex, coordinated hormonal cascade that plays a pivotal role in controlling individual cell behaviour and multiple organ functions. ACE2 acts as an endogenous counter-regulator to the pro-inflammatory and pro-fibrotic pathways triggered by ACE through the conversion of Ang II into the vasodilatory peptide Ang 1-7. We discuss the structure, function and expression of ACE2 in different tissues. We also briefly describe the role of ACE2 as a pivotal driver across a wide spectrum of pathogenic conditions, such as cardiac and renal diseases. Furthermore, we provide the most recent data concerning the possible role of ACE2 in mediating SARS-CoV-2 infection and dictating COVID-19 severity.

RAMIC: Design of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of ramipril in patients with COVID-19

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Retrospective studies have shown that angiotensin-converting-enzyme (ACE) inhibitors are associated with a reduced risk of complications and mortality in persons with novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Thus, we aimed to examine the efficacy of ramipril, an ACE-inhibitor, in preventing ICU admission, mechanical ventilation and/or mortality while also minimizing the risk of transmission and use of personal protective equipment (PPE).

METHODS

RAMIC is a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, allocation-concealed, placebo-controlled trial comparing the efficacy of treatment with ramipril 2.5 mg orally daily compared to placebo for 14 days. The study population includes adult patients with COVID-19 who were admitted to a hospital or assessed in an emergency department or ambulatory clinic. Key exclusion criteria include ICU admission or need for mechanical ventilation at screening, use of an ACE inhibitor or angiotensin-receptor-II blocker within 7 days, glomerular filtration rate < 40 mL/min or a systolic blood pressure (BP) < 100 mmHg or diastolic BP < 65 mmHg. Patients are randomized 2:1 to receive ramipril (2.5 mg) or placebo daily. Informed consent and study visits occur virtually to minimize the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission and preserve PPE. The primary composite endpoint of ICU admission, invasive mechanical ventilation and death are adjudicated virtually.

CONCLUSIONS

RAMIC is designed to assess the efficacy of treatment with ramipril for 14 days to decrease ICU admission, mechanical ventilator use and mortality in patients with COVID-19 and leverages virtual study visits and endpoint adjudication to mitigate risk of infection and to preserve PPE (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04366050).

COVID-19, hydroxychloroquine and sudden cardiac death: implications for clinical practice in patients with rheumatic diseases

Sudden cardiac death is commonly seen due to arrhythmias, which is a common cardiac manifestation seen in COVID-19 patients, especially those with underlying cardiovascular disease (CVD). Administration of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) as a potential treatment option during SARS-CoV-2, initially gained popularity, but later, its safe usage became questionable due to its cardiovascular safety, largely stemming from instances of cardiac arrhythmias in COVID-19. Moreover, in the setting of rheumatic diseases, in which patients are usually on HCQ for their primary disease, there is a need to scale the merits and demerits of HCQ usage for the treatment of COVID-19. In this narrative review, we aim to address the association between usage of HCQ and sudden cardiac death in COVID-19 patients. MEDLINE, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov and SCOPUS databases were used to review articles in English ranging from case reports, case series, letter to editors, systematic reviews, narrative reviews, observational studies and randomized control trials. HCQ is a potential cause of sudden cardiac death in COVID-19 patients. As opposed to the reduction in CVD with HCQ in treatment of systemic lupus erythematous, rheumatoid arthritis, and other rheumatic diseases, safe usage of HCQ in COVID-19 patients is unclear; whereby, it is observed to result in QTc prolongation and Torsades de pointes even in patients with no underlying cardiovascular comorbidity. This is occasionally associated with sudden cardiac death or cardiac arrest; hence, its clinical efficacy needs further investigation by large-scale clinical trials.

The impact of vitamin D supplementation on mortality rate and clinical outcomes of COVID-19 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.. [DOI: 10.1101/2021.01.04.21249219]

Background

Several studies have suggested the positive impact of vitamin D on patients infected with SARS-CoV-2. This systematic review aims to evaluate the effects of vitamin D supplementation on clinical outcomes and mortality rate of COVID-19 patients.

Methods

A comprehensive search was conducted through the databases of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Knowledge, Embase, Ovid, and The Cochrane Library with no limitation in time and language, until December 16, 2020. The results were screened based on their accordance with the subject. Two independent reviewers selected the eligible studies and the outcomes of interest were extracted. Using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Tools for Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) and Quasi-Experimental Studies, the remaining results were appraised critically. Statistical analysis was performed using the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (CMA) software version 2.0.

Results

Of the 2311 results, 1305 duplicated results were removed. After screening the titles, abstracts, and the full-text articles of the remaining records, four studies and 259 patients were enrolled, including 139 patients in vitamin D intervention groups. In three of the studies, the patients’ survival and mortality rate were evaluated. The pooled analysis of these studies showed a significantly lower mortality rate among the intervention groups (10.56%) compared with the control groups (23.88%) (OR = 0.264, 95% CI = 0.099–0.708, p-value = 0.008). Two of the studies reported the clinical outcomes based on the World Health Organization’s Ordinal Scale for Clinical Improvement (OSCI) score for COVID-19, where both of them showed a significant decrease in OSCI score in the vitamin D intervention groups. Additionally, One study reported a lower rate of intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and one study reported a significant decrease in serum levels of Fibrinogen.

Conclusion

Prescribing vitamin D supplementation to patients with COVID-19 infection seems to decrease the mortality rate, the severity of the disease, and serum levels of the inflammatory markers. Further studies are needed to determine the ideal type, dosage and duration of supplementation.

Mechanism and transmission routes of COVID-19

A recent form of novel coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which has emerged in China, appears to have a distinct genome from the previously sequenced coronavirus. SARS-CoV-2 is shown to cause acute respiratory infections in humans. SARS-CoV-2 is a ribonucleic acid virus believed to have transmitted from a zoonotic host accompanied by human-to-human spread that has contributed to a recent pandemic. Clinical symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019 patients start with tiredness, sore throat, cough, running nose, and fever, and then progressing to trouble breathing and loss of taste; severe cases experience death due to organ failure. Also, a few affected individuals can also be asymptomatic. Elderly and individuals with chronic conditions viz. hypertension, diabetes, and cardiac complications are more vulnerable to viral infection and disease severity. In this chapter, we discuss in detail the origin of SARS-CoV-2, followed by the various risk factors that could influence the infection, and finally the different modes of viral transmission.

Comparison of Severity of COVID-19 Infection among Patients Using RAAS Inhibitors and Non-RAAS Inhibitors

Aims and objectives

The aim of the article was to study the safety profile of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitor in COVID-19-affected Indian patients.

Introduction

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is responsible for COVID-19 infection. There has been uncertainty about use of RAAS inhibitors in COVID-19. The association of RAAS inhibitors with severity of infection and clinical outcomes was addressed in this study.

Materials and methods

This is a single-center retrospective study from Indian intensive care unit (ICU). A total of 138 were included, who were divided into group A (RAAS inhibitor) and group B (non-RAAS inhibitor). They are followed up till ICU stay during which peak levels of ferritin, D dimer, interleukin-6 were noted (primary outcome). The number of ventilator days, ICU length of stay, and ICU outcome also compared.

Results

Of 138 patients, 18 are included in group A and 120, in group B. There is no difference in peak levels (mean) D dimer [5,893 vs 7,710, p 0.46], ferritin [2,388 vs 3,635, p 0.56], interleukin-6 [9,597 vs 3,625, p 0.06]. There is no difference in number of ventilator days (2.2 vs 1.78, p 0.53) and ICU length of stay (6.5 vs 6.1, p 0.74).

Conclusion

RAAS inhibitors can be safely continued in COVID-19 infection. It is not associated with an increase in severity of infection, ICU length of stay, and mortality.

How to cite this article

Reddy PR, Samavedam S, Aluru N, Rajyalakshmi B. Comparison of Severity of COVID-19 Infection among Patients Using RAAS Inhibitors and Non-RAAS Inhibitors. Indian J Crit Care Med 2021;25(4):366–368.

Prevalence and impact of cardiac injury on COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The exact prevalence and impact of cardiac injury in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is still controversial. Hence, we aim to investigate prevalence of cardiac injury and its impact on the outcomes in patients with COVID-19.

HYPOTHESIS

Cardiac injury is common and associated with higher risk of death.

METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, MedRxiv, and EMBASE databases from December 2019 to July 15, 2020 for studies that evaluated the prevalence and impact of cardiac injury on COVID-19. This study has been registered with PROSPERO (International prospective register of systematic reviews)-registration number-CRD-42020186120.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies including 6297 participants were identified. The proportions of cardiac injury were 22%, 28% among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 or severe COVID-19 patients, respectively. The incidences of cardiac injury in advance age (>60 years) (30%) was about two-fold than young patients (<60 years) (15%) with COVID-19. Severe cases (42%) have seven-fold prevalence cardiac injury than in their non- severe counterparts (6%). Furthermore, cardiac injury is associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19 (OR 10.11, 95% CI 4.49-22.77). In patients with severe COVID-19, cardiac injury is associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality (OR: 16.79, 95% CI: 5.52-51.02).

CONCLUSIONS

This was the first meta-analysis exploring the prevalence and impact of cardiac injury on COVID-19. Cardiac injury is common in hospitalized patients and advanced age and severe COVID-19 patients prone to experience more risk of cardiac injury. Furthermore, cardiac injury is associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality.

Mortality and Disease Severity Among COVID-19 Patients Receiving Renin-Angiotensin System Inhibitors: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The use of renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors, including angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), was alleged to cause a more severe course of novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

METHODS

We systematically reviewed the published studies to assess the association of RAS inhibitors with mortality as well as disease severity in COVID-19 patients. A systematic literature search was performed to retrieve relevant original studies investigating mortality and severity (severe/critical disease) in COVID-19 patients with and without exposure to RAS inhibitors.

RESULTS

A total of 59 original studies were included for qualitative synthesis. Twenty-four studies that reported adjusted effect sizes (24 studies reported mortality outcomes and 16 studies reported disease severity outcomes), conducted in RAS inhibitor-exposed and unexposed groups, were pooled in random-effects models to estimate overall risk. Quality assessment of studies revealed that most of the studies included were of fair quality. The use of an ACEI/ARB in COVID-19 patients was significantly associated with lower odds (odds ratio [OR] = 0.73, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56-0.95; n = 18,749) or hazard (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.75, 95% CI 0.60-0.95; n = 26,598) of mortality compared with non-use of ACEI/ARB. However, the use of an ACEI/ARB was non-significantly associated with lower odds (OR = 0.91, 95% CI 0.75-1.10; n = 7446) or hazard (HR = 0.73, 95% CI 0.33-1.66; n = 6325) of developing severe/critical disease compared with non-use of an ACEI/ARB.

DISCUSSION

Since there was no increased risk of harm, the use of RAS inhibitors for hypertension and other established clinical indications can be maintained in COVID-19 patients.

Targeting the renin-angiotensin signaling pathway in COVID-19: Unanswered questions, opportunities, and challenges

The role of the renin-angiotensin signaling (RAS) pathway in COVID-19 has received much attention. A central mechanism for COVID-19 pathophysiology has been proposed: imbalance of angiotensin converting enzymes (ACE)1 and ACE2 (ACE2 being the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 [SARS-CoV-2] virus "receptor") that results in tissue injury from angiotensin II (Ang II)-mediated signaling. This mechanism provides a rationale for multiple therapeutic approaches. In parallel, clinical data from retrospective analysis of COVID-19 cohorts has revealed that ACE inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) may be beneficial in COVID-19. These findings have led to the initiation of clinical trials using approved drugs that target the generation (ACEIs) and actions (ARBs) of Ang II. However, treatment of COVID-19 with ACEIs/ARBs poses several challenges. These include choosing appropriate inclusion and exclusion criteria, dose optimization, risk of adverse effects and drug interactions, and verification of target engagement. Other approaches related to the RAS pathway might be considered, for example, inhalational administration of ACEIs/ARBs (to deliver drugs directly to the lungs) and use of compounds with other actions (e.g., activation of ACE2, agonism of MAS1 receptors, β-arrestin-based Angiotensin receptor agonists, and administration of soluble ACE2 or ACE2 peptides). Studies with animal models could test such approaches and assess therapeutic benefit. This Perspective highlights questions whose answers could advance RAS-targeting agents as mechanism-driven ways to blunt tissue injury, morbidity, and mortality of COVID-19.

Novel Evidence of Acute Kidney Injury in COVID-19

The coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused a huge impact on health and economic issues. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causes cellular damage by entry mediated by the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 of the host cells and its conjugation with spike proteins of SARS-CoV-2. Beyond airway infection and acute respiratory distress syndrome, acute kidney injury is common in SARS-CoV-2-associated infection, and acute kidney injury (AKI) is predictive to multiorgan dysfunction in SARS-CoV-2 infection. Beyond the cytokine storm and hemodynamic instability, SARS-CoV-2 might directly induce kidney injury and cause histopathologic characteristics, including acute tubular necrosis, podocytopathy and microangiopathy. The expression of apparatus mediating SARS-CoV-2 entry, including angiotensin-converting enzyme 2, transmembrane protease serine 2 (TMPRSS2) and a disintegrin and metalloprotease 17 (ADAM17), within the renal tubular cells is highly associated with acute kidney injury mediated by SARS-CoV-2. Both entry from the luminal and basolateral sides of the renal tubular cells are the possible routes for COVID-19, and the microthrombi associated with severe sepsis and the dysregulated renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system worsen further renal injury in SARS-CoV-2-associated AKI. In the podocytes of the glomerulus, injured podocyte expressed CD147, which mediated the entry of SARS-CoV-2 and worsen further foot process effacement, which would worsen proteinuria, and the chronic hazard induced by SARS-CoV-2-mediated kidney injury is still unknown. Therefore, the aim of the review is to summarize current evidence on SARS-CoV-2-associated AKI and the possible pathogenesis directly by SARS-CoV-2.