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

Ursodeoxycholic acid and COVID-19 outcomes: a cohort study and data synthesis of state-of-art evidence

BACKGROUND

The potential of ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) in inhibiting angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 was demonstrated. However, conflicting evidence emerged regarding the association between UDCA and COVID-19 outcomes, prompting the need for a comprehensive investigation.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Patients diagnosed with COVID-19 infection were retrospectively analyzed and divided into two groups: the UDCA-treated group and the control group. Kaplan-Meier recovery analysis and Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate the recovery time and hazard ratios. Additionally, study-level pooled analyses for multiple clinical outcomes were performed.

RESULTS

In the 115-patient cohort, UDCA treatment was significantly associated with a reduced recovery time. The subgroup analysis suggests that the 300 mg subgroup had a significant (adjusted hazard ratio: 1.63 [95% CI, 1.01 to 2.60]) benefit with a shorter duration of fever. The results of pooled analyses also show that UDCA treatment can significantly reduce the incidence of severe/critical diseases in COVID-19 (adjusted odds ratio: 0.68 [95% CI, 0.50 to 0.94]).

CONCLUSIONS

UDCA treatment notably improves the recovery time following an Omicron strain infection without observed safety concerns. These promising results advocate for UDCA as a viable treatment for COVID-19, paving the way for further large-scale and prospective research to explore the full potential of UDCA.

SARS-CoV-2 and the Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2 Receptor: Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor/Angiotensin 2 Receptor Blocker Utilization and a Shift Towards the Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System Classical Pathway

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus responsible for the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, uses the surface angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor as the site of entry into host cardiac, respiratory, intestinal, renal, and nervous system cells. Predisposing risk factors such as cardiovascular disease increase the risk of developing severe disease. Hypertension is characterized by the stimulation of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS). Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEis) and angiotensin 2 receptor blockers (ARBs), medications used to treat hypertension, inhibit RAAS and its downstream effects; however, they have also been shown to upregulate ACE2 receptors. In this review, we aim to evaluate the effectiveness of ACEi/ARBs as an adjunct therapy in patients with SARS-CoV-2 as well as examine the possible protective effects and impact on infection rate and disease severity. A PubMed literature search excluding sources outside the United States and duplicates was performed using the following search criteria: "COVID-19 AND cardiovascular disease AND ACEi AND ARB", "SARS-COVID-19 OR COVID-19, AND ACEi AND ARB AND Infection rate", "COVID-19 AND ACEi and ARB", "Omicron BA.1 and BA.2 AND ACE2 OR ARBs", "Omicron AND ACEi AND ARBs". This resulted in 33 final sources. The review concluded that ACEi/ARB therapy may continue to improve COVID-19 survival as previous treatment is associated with positive clinical outcomes. Patients taking ACEis or ARBs were found to have a decreased risk of hospitalization, reduced severity of COVID-19 pneumonia, a lesser need for mechanical ventilation, and an overall reduction in mortality rate. No statistically significant association between ACEi/ARB use and enhanced COVID-19 infectivity was found. The Omicron variant is theoretically more infectious and was associated with increased negative clinical outcomes in those undertreated with ACEis/ARBs. The majority of the literature supports the current guidelines from the American College of Cardiology (ACC), American Heart Association (AHA), European Society of Cardiology (ESC), and Heart Failure Society of America (HFSA), which state that ACEi and ARB medications should not be withdrawn from or initiated on patients with cardiovascular disease who are infected with SARS-CoV-2. More research needs to be conducted on the association between the emerging COVID-19 variants and ACEis/ARBs to give clinicians confidence when treating patients within this subgroup of the population.

Comparing clinical outcomes of ARB and ACEi in patients hospitalized for acute COVID-19

Continued receipt of Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone inhibitors in patients with COVID-19 has shown potential in producing better clinical outcomes. However, superiority between ACEi (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors) and ARB (angiotensin II receptor blockers) regarding clinical outcomes in this setting remains unknown. We retrospectively collected data on patients hospitalized for acute COVID-19 using the nationwide administrative database (Diagnosis and Procedure Combinations, DPC). The DPC data covered around 25% of all acute care hospitals in Japan. Patient outcomes, with focus on inpatient mortality, were compared between patients previously prescribed ACEi and those prescribed ARB. Comparisons based on crude, multivariate and propensity-score adjusted analysis were conducted. We examined a total of 7613 patients (ARB group, 6903; ACEi group 710). The ARB group showed lower crude in-hospital mortality, compared to the ACEi group (5% vs 8%; odds ratio, 0.65; 95% CI 0.48-0.87), however not in the multivariate-adjusted model (odds ratio, 0.95; 95% CI 0.69-1.3) or propensity-score adjusted models (odds ratio, 0.86; 95% CI 0.63-1.2). ARB shows potential in reducing hospital stay duration over ACEi in patients admitted for COVID-19, but does not significantly reduce in-hospital mortality. Further prospective studies are needed to draw a definitive conclusion, but continuation of either of these medications is warranted to improve clinical outcomes.

To Anticoagulate or Not to Anticoagulate in COVID-19: Lessons after 2 Years

A hypercoagulable state associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been well documented and is believed to be strongly supported by a proinflammatory state. The hypercoagulable state in turn results in increased incidence of arterial and venous thromboembolism (VTE) seen in hospitalized COVID-19 when compared with hospitalized non-COVID-19 patient cohorts. Moreover, patients with arterial or VTE and COVID-19 have higher mortality compared with COVID-19 patients without arterial or VTE. Prevention of arterial or VTE thus remains an essential question in the management of COVID-19 patients, especially because of high rates of reported microvascular and macrovascular thrombosis. This has prompted multiple randomized control trials (RCTs) evaluating different anticoagulation strategies in COVID-19 patients at various stages of the disease. Herein, we review findings from RCTs in the past 2 years of antithrombotic therapy in critically ill hospitalized patients, noncritically ill hospitalized patients, patients postdischarge from the hospital, and outpatients. RCTs in critically ill patients demonstrated therapeutic dose anticoagulation does not improve outcomes and has more bleeding than prophylaxis dose anticoagulant in these patients. Trials in noncritically ill hospitalized patients showed a therapeutic dose anticoagulation with a heparin formulation might improve clinical outcomes. Anticoagulation with a direct oral anticoagulant posthospital discharge may improve outcomes, although there is a large RCT in progress. Nonhospitalized COVID-19 patients have an insufficient burden of events to be candidates for antithrombotic therapy. Anticoagulation in pregnant and lactating patients with COVID-19, as well as antiplatelet therapy for COVID-19, is also reviewed.

Coronavirus disease 2019, hypertension, and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) mostly uses the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE-2) as cellular receptor for entering the host cells. Some, but not all, animal studies have shown that renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors can increase ACE-2 expression. On that premise, it was hypothesized that these agents could make it more likely to develop coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). On the other hand, there was also evidence that being on these agents could lessen the severity of the lung injury in patients with severe SARS-CoV-2 infection. Herein, we review the available evidence on the role of RAAS inhibitors on SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 development.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent randomized controlled trials demonstrate that RAAS blockade or withdrawal does not influence the severity of COVID-19 in patients who are already on these medications. Currently, there is no evidence to support stopping RAAS inhibitors in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. Several questions still need to be addressed. Ongoing studies are currently evaluating the de novo use of RAAS inhibitors in patients with COVID-19. Another area that needs to be investigated is whether or not using these medications increase the risk of infection.

SUMMARY

The wealth of evidence indicates that ACE inhibitors and angiotensin-receptor blocker administration has no harmful effects on hospitalizations and severity of COVID-19 in patients already on these medications and might even reduce mortality among hypertensive patients diagnosed with COVID-19. More evidence and data need to be collected, and at this time, these agents should not be discontinued.

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.