Routine screening for pulmonary embolism in COVID-19 patients at the emergency department: impact of D-dimer testing followed by CTPA

Incidence, risk factors, and mortality of pulmonary embolism in the Netherlands (2015-22): sex differences and shifts during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Epidemiology of pulmonary embolism (PE) may have shifted since the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. This study aimed to describe temporal trends in PE epidemiology in the Netherlands since 2015.

METHODS

Using nationwide data from Statistics Netherlands, all Dutch inhabitants (>16 million) without a history of PE were dynamically identified on 1 January of each year to assemble eight cohorts of PE-free Dutch inhabitants in 2015-22. They were individually followed until the end of that respective year to determine 1-year risk of PE (identified by hospital diagnoses/primary cause of death) and establish relevant risk factors. The PE cases were subsequently studied to determine 1-year all-cause mortality following PE. Multivariable logistic regression with cluster-robust standard errors and robust Poisson regression were respectively employed to evaluate relative differences in PE incidence and mortality between years.

RESULTS

Pulmonary embolism incidence in the Dutch population decreased from 2015 to 2019 but markedly increased by 23% (95% confidence interval 20%-26%), 52% (48%-56%), and 7% (4%-9%) in 2020-22 (vs. 2019), respectively. Most traditional PE risk factors remained associated with PE in 2020-22 but generally with a weaker association. Pulmonary embolism mortality was stable until 2019 but then increased by 10% (6%-14%) in 2020 and 9% (6%-13%) in 2021, while the increase [2% (-1% to 6%)] was insignificant in 2022. The above-mentioned changes since 2020 were generally greater in males than females.

CONCLUSIONS

The seemingly favourable pre-pandemic temporal trends in PE epidemiology in the Netherlands reversed during the COVID-19 pandemic but appear to revert to pre-pandemic levels after 2022.

Cross-sectional study evaluating the impact of SARS-CoV-2 variants on Long COVID outcomes in UK hospital survivors

OBJECTIVES

COVID-19 studies report on hospital admission outcomes across SARS-CoV-2 waves of infection but knowledge of the impact of SARS-CoV-2 variants on the development of Long COVID in hospital survivors is limited. We sought to investigate Long COVID outcomes, aiming to compare outcomes in adult hospitalised survivors with known variants of concern during our first and second UK COVID-19 waves, prior to widespread vaccination.

DESIGN

Prospective observational cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Secondary care tertiary hospital in the UK.

PARTICIPANTS

This study investigated Long COVID in 673 adults with laboratory-positive SARS-CoV-2 infection or clinically suspected COVID-19, 6 weeks after hospital discharge. We compared adults with wave 1 (wildtype variant, admitted from February to April 2020) and wave 2 patients (confirmed Alpha variant on viral sequencing (B.1.1.7), admitted from December 2020 to February 2021).

OUTCOME MEASURES

Associations of Long COVID presence (one or more of 14 symptoms) and total number of Long COVID symptoms with SARS-CoV-2 variant were analysed using multiple logistic and Poisson regression, respectively.

RESULTS

322/400 (wave 1) and 248/273 (wave 2) patients completed follow-up. Predictors of increased total number of Long COVID symptoms included: pre-existing lung disease (adjusted count ratio (aCR)=1.26, 95% CI 1.07, 1.48) and more COVID-19 admission symptoms (aCR=1.07, 95% CI 1.02, 1.12). Weaker associations included increased length of inpatient stay (aCR=1.02, 95% CI 1.00, 1.03) and later review after discharge (aCR=1.00, 95% CI 1.00, 1.01). SARS-CoV-2 variant was not associated with Long COVID presence (OR=0.99, 95% CI 0.24, 4.20) or total number of symptoms (aCR=1.09, 95% CI 0.82, 1.44).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with chronic lung disease or greater COVID-19 admission symptoms have higher Long COVID risk. SARS-CoV-2 variant was not predictive of Long COVID though in wave 2 we identified fewer admission symptoms, improved clinical trajectory and outcomes. Addressing modifiable factors such as length of stay and timepoint of clinical review following discharge may enable clinicians to move from Long COVID risk stratification towards improving its outcome.

Literature Review-Transthoracic Echocardiography, Computed Tomography Angiography, and Their Value in Clinical Decision Making and Outcome Predictions in Patients with COVID-19 Associated Cardiovascular Complications

The sudden outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic posed a great threat to the world's healthcare systems. It resulted in the development of new methods and algorithms for the diagnosis and treatment of both COVID-19 and its complications. Diagnostic imaging played a crucial role in both cases. Among the most widely used examinations are transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) and computed tomography angiography (CTA). Cardiovascular complications in COVID-19 are frequently associated with a severe inflammatory response, which results in acute respiratory failure, further leading to severe complications of the cardiovascular system. Our review aims to discuss the value of TTE and CTA in clinical decision making and outcome prediction in patients with COVID-19-associated cardiovascular complications. Our review revealed the high clinical value of various TTE findings and their association with mortality and the prediction of patients' clinical outcomes, especially when used with other laboratory parameters. The strongest association between increased mortality and findings in TTE was observed for tachycardia and decreased left ventricular ejection fraction (odds ratio (OR) 24.06) and tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion/pulmonary artery systolic pressure ratio (TAPSE/PASP ratio) < 0.31 mm/mmHg (OR 17.80). CTA is a valuable tool in diagnosing COVID-19-associated pulmonary embolism, but its association with mortality and its predictive role should always be combined with laboratory findings and patients' medical history. D-dimers > 3000 ng/mL were found as the strongest predictors of pulmonary embolism (PE) (OR 7.494). Our review indicates the necessity for an active search for cardiovascular complications in patients with severe COVID-19, as they are linked with an increased probability of fatal outcomes.

A Clinical Prediction Rule for Thrombosis in Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients: Step 1 Results of the Thromcco Study

The incidence of thrombosis in COVID-19 patients is exceptionally high among intensive care unit (ICU)-admitted individuals. We aimed to develop a clinical prediction rule for thrombosis in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Data were taken from the Thromcco study (TS) database, which contains information on consecutive adults (aged ≥ 18) admitted to eight Spanish ICUs between March 2020 and October 2021. Diverse logistic regression model analysis, including demographic data, pre-existing conditions, and blood tests collected during the first 24 h of hospitalization, was performed to build a model that predicted thrombosis. Once obtained, the numeric and categorical variables considered were converted to factor variables giving them a score. Out of 2055 patients included in the TS database, 299 subjects with a median age of 62.4 years (IQR 51.5-70) (79% men) were considered in the final model (SE = 83%, SP = 62%, accuracy = 77%). Seven variables with assigned scores were delineated as age 25-40 and ≥70 = 12, age 41-70 = 13, male = 1, D-dimer ≥ 500 ng/mL = 13, leukocytes ≥ 10 × 10³/µL = 1, interleukin-6 ≥ 10 pg/mL = 1, and C-reactive protein (CRP) ≥ 50 mg/L = 1. Score values ≥28 had a sensitivity of 88% and specificity of 29% for thrombosis. This score could be helpful in recognizing patients at higher risk for thrombosis, but further research is needed.

Systematic screening versus clinical gestalt in the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism in COVID-19 patients in the emergency department

BACKGROUND

Diagnosing concomitant pulmonary embolism (PE) in COVID-19 patients remains challenging. As such, PE may be overlooked. We compared the diagnostic yield of systematic PE-screening based on the YEARS-algorithm to PE-screening based on clinical gestalt in emergency department (ED) patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

We included all ED patients who were admitted because of COVID-19 between March 2020 and February 2021. Patients already receiving anticoagulant treatment were excluded. Up to April 7, 2020, the decision to perform CT-pulmonary angiography (CTPA) was based on physician's clinical gestalt (clinical gestalt cohort). From April 7 onwards, systematic PE-screening was performed by CTPA if D-dimer level was ≥1000 ug/L, or ≥500 ug/L in case of ≥1 YEARS-item (systematic screening cohort).

RESULTS

1095 ED patients with COVID-19 were admitted. After applying exclusion criteria, 289 were included in the clinical gestalt and 574 in the systematic screening cohort. The number of PE diagnoses was significantly higher in the systematic screening cohort compared to the clinical gestalt cohort: 8.2% vs. 1.0% (3/289 vs. 47/574; p<0.001), even after adjustment for differences in patient characteristics (adjusted OR 8.45 (95%CI 2.61-27.42, p<0.001) for PE diagnosis). In multivariate analysis, D-dimer (OR 1.09 per 1000 μg/L increase, 95%CI 1.06-1.13, p<0.001) and CRP >100 mg/L (OR 2.78, 95%CI 1.37-5.66, p = 0.005) were independently associated with PE.

CONCLUSION

In ED patients with COVID-19, the number of PE diagnosis was significantly higher in the cohort that underwent systematic PE screening based on the YEARS-algorithm in comparison with the clinical gestalt cohort, with a number needed to test of 7.1 CTPAs to detect one PE.

Examining D-dimer and Empiric Anti-coagulation in COVID-19-Related Thrombosis

Objective

Thrombosis is thought to occur frequently in the setting of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. We aimed to elucidate the relationship between macro/microvascular thrombosis, D-dimer levels, and empiric anticoagulation in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

Methods

This was an exploratory prospective, single-site, observational study. Adult emergency department patients with COVID-19 requiring hospitalization received a point-of-care lower extremity venous duplex ultrasound. The primary endpoint was thromboembolism and associated D-dimer level. Secondary endpoints included rates of micro and macro thrombotic complications as well as empiric anticoagulant use.

Results

Between January 13^th and April 12^th 2021, 52 patients were enrolled. Median D-dimer at presentation was 650 ng/mL (range 250-10,000 ng/mL) among patients with negative duplex studies. During hospitalization, 18 patients underwent 20 additional studies assessing for venous thromboembolism (VTE). These studies yielded one deep vein thrombosis (DVT) diagnosis. Among patients with negative studies median D-dimer was 1,246 ng/mL (range 329-10,000 ng/mL). Two patients experienced microvascular complications. Seven patients were started on empiric full dose anticoagulation.

Conclusion

While VTE remains a major concern amongst patients with COVID-19, the normal D-dimer cut off of >500 ng/mL likely should not be used to initiate further VTE workup. Additionally, moderately elevated D-dimer did not correlate strongly with microvascular complications and may not be relevant in the decision to initiate empiric anticoagulation.

A comparison of pulmonary embolism in pediatric and adult patients with acute COVID-19

Background

COVID-19 is associated with pulmonary embolism (PE) in adults. However, the rate of PE in pediatric patients with acute COVID-19 evaluated by CT pulmonary angiography (CTPA) has not been evaluated.

Objective

Determine PE rate in pediatric patients with acute COVID-19 and compare to adults.

Materials and methods

A retrospective review of CTPA studies, performed between March 2020 and January 2021 on pediatric patients with acute COVID-19, but not MIS-C, was performed. CTPAs performed on an adult cohort of acute COVID-19 patients during April 2020 were reviewed for comparison. Pediatric and chest radiologists independently reviewed CTPAs of pediatric and adult patients, respectively.

Results

Of the 355 acute COVID-19 pediatric patients treated during the study period, 14 (16.6 ± 4.8y, median-18.5y, 64% female) underwent CTPA. Of the 1868 acute COVID-19 adults treated during two weeks in April 2020, 50 (57.2 ± 17.0y, median-57.0y, 42% female) underwent CTPA. The PE rate was 14% in the pediatric group (2 patients) and 18% in the adult group (9 patients) (p = 1.0). Both pediatric patients with PE were obese, over 18y, and had asthma, diabetes mellitus, or hypertension. No child<18y with acute COVID-19 had PE. In the adult cohort, higher alanine-aminotransferase and D-dimer levels were associated with PE (p = 0.04 and p = 0.004, respectively).

Conclusion

Despite similar PE rates in pediatric and adult patients, PE occurred in acute COVID-19 pediatric patients who were >18y, obese, and had at least 1 comorbidity. Children <18y with COVID-19 did not have PE.

Cardiovascular implications of the COVID-19 pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has rapidly emerged as one of the biggest public health concerns of the 21st century. Although it was initially reported as a cluster of pneumonia cases, it quickly became apparent that COVID-19 is not merely a respiratory tract infection. Its clinical course is often complicated by cardiovascular manifestations including venous and arterial thrombosis, electrical disturbances, and myocardial damage. In addition, the cardiovascular system is involved not only during infection but also preceding the contraction of the virus; having cardiovascular comorbidities indicates significant vulnerability to the pathogen. As longer-term data continue to accumulate, we now have concerns over its lasting cardiovascular effects after recovery. Moreover, there have been substantial collateral effects on the epidemiology of cardiovascular diseases. Reports of adverse cardiovascular events from vaccination have emerged as new hurdles to our efforts to bring an end to the pandemic. As such, the association between COVID-19 and the cardiovascular system and cardiovascular practice in general is expansive. In this review, we provide an overview of the knowledge and considerations in this field, based on the evidence available at the time of this writing.