Continued In-Hospital Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor and Angiotensin II Receptor Blocker Use in Hypertensive COVID-19 Patients Is Associated With Positive Clinical Outcome

Current status and clinical outcomes of pharmacotherapies according to SARS-CoV-2 mutations in patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19: a retrospective single center study

BACKGROUND

During the pandemic period, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) mutated, leading to changes in the disease's severity and the therapeutic effect of drugs accordingly. This study aimed to present the actual use of therapeutics and clinical outcomes based on the prevalence of each variant using real-world data.

METHODS

We analyzed the electronic medical records of adult patients admitted to Busan Medical Center after confirming coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) from February 1, 2020, to June 30, 2022. Patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 who were at a high risk of disease progression were selected as study subjects, and the time period was classified according to the variants as ancestral strain, Delta variant, or Omicron variant. We compared drug use status and clinical outcomes by time period.

RESULTS

Among all 3,091 patients, corticosteroids were the most commonly used therapy (56.0%), being used most frequently in the Delta variant (93.0%), followed by the Omicron variant (42.9%) and ancestral strain (21.2%). Regdanvimab accounted for the majority of therapeutic use in the Delta variant (82.9%) and ancestral strain (76.8%), whereas remdesivir was most frequently used during the Omicron variant period (68.9%). The composite outcomes of death or disease aggravation were ranked in the order of the Delta variant, Omicron variant, and ancestral strain (14.5, 11.9, and 6.0%, respectively, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Regdanvimab was primarily used during the ancestral strain period, regdanvimab plus corticosteroids during the Delta variant period, and remdesivir during the Omicron variant period. The rate of death or disease aggravation was highest in the Delta variant, followed by the Omicron variant and the ancestral strain.

Patients with type 1 diabetes are at elevated risk of developing new hypertension, chronic kidney disease and diabetic ketoacidosis after COVID-19: Up to 40 months' follow-up

AIM

The aim was to investigate whether COVID-19 increases new incidence of hypertension (HTN), chronic kidney disease (CKD) and diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) up to 40 months post-infection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Three groups of patients from the Montefiore Health System in the Bronx (1 March 2020 to 1 July 2023) were studied: T1D patients hospitalized for COVID-19 (H-COVID-19, n = 511), T1D patients with COVID-19 but not hospitalized for COVID-19 (NH-COVID-19, n = 306) and T1D patients without a positive COVID-19 test on record (non-COVID-19, n = 1547). COVID-19 patients were those with a positive polymerase-chain-reaction test on record, and non-COVID-19 patients were either tested negative or not tested on record. Cumulative incidences and adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were computed with adjustment for competing risks.

RESULTS

Compared to non-COVID-19 patients, both H-COVID-19 (unadjusted 19.72% vs. 3.14%, p < 0.001; aHR = 7.55 [3.33, 17.06], p < 0.001) and NH-COVID-19 (10.26% vs. 3.14%, p = 0.004; aHR = 5.08 [2.19, 11.78], p < 0.001) patients were more likely to develop new HTN. Compared to non-COVID-19 patients, both H-COVID-19 (11.41% vs. 1.14%, p < 0.001; aHR = 9.76 [4.248, 22.25], p < 0.001) and NH-COVID-19 (7.69% vs. 1.14%, p < 0.001; aHR = 6.54 [2.91, 14.67], p < 0.001) patients were more likely to develop new CKD. Compared to non-COVID-19 patients, both H-COVID-19 (4.09% vs. 1.06%, p < 0.001; aHR = 12.24 [4.09, 36.59], p < 0.001) and NH-COVID-19 (3.06% vs. 1.06%, p = 0.035; aHR = 12.94 [4.09, 40.89], p < 0.001) patients were more likely to develop new DKA at follow-up.

CONCLUSION

T1D patients with COVID-19 are at higher risk of developing new HTN, CKD and DKA compared to T1D patients without COVID-19.

Pharmacogenetic study of CES1 gene and enalapril efficacy

Enalapril is an orally administered angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor which is widely prescribed to treat hypertension, chronic kidney disease, and heart failure. It is an ester prodrug that needs to be activated by carboxylesterase 1 (CES1). CES1 is a hepatic hydrolase that in vivo biotransforms enalapril to its active form enalaprilat in order to produce its desired pharmacological impact. Several single nucleotide polymorphisms in CES1 gene are reported to alter the catalytic activity of CES1 enzyme and influence enalapril metabolism. G143E, L40T, G142E, G147C, Y170D, and R171C can completely block the enalapril metabolism. Some polymorphisms like Q169P, E220G, and D269fs do not completely block the CES1 function; however, they reduce the catalytic activity of CES1 enzyme. The prevalence of these polymorphisms is not the same among all populations which necessitate to consider the genetic panel of respective population before prescribing enalapril. These genetic variations are also responsible for interindividual variability of CES1 enzyme activity which ultimately affects the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of enalapril. The current review summarizes the CES1 polymorphisms which influence the enalapril metabolism and efficacy. The structure of CES1 catalytic domain and important amino acids impacting the catalytic activity of CES1 enzyme are also discussed. This review also highlights the importance of pharmacogenomics in personalized medicine.

Role of renin-angiotensin system/angiotensin converting enzyme-2 mechanism and enhanced COVID-19 susceptibility in type 2 diabetes mellitus

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a disease that caused a global pandemic and is caused by infection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 virus. It has affected over 768 million people worldwide, resulting in approximately 6900000 deaths. High-risk groups, identified by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, include individuals with conditions like type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), obesity, chronic lung disease, serious heart conditions, and chronic kidney disease. Research indicates that those with T2DM face a heightened susceptibility to COVID-19 and increased mortality compared to non-diabetic individuals. Examining the renin-angiotensin system (RAS), a vital regulator of blood pressure and pulmonary stability, reveals the significance of the angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) and ACE2 enzymes. ACE converts angiotensin-I to the vasoconstrictor angiotensin-II, while ACE2 counters this by converting angiotensin-II to angiotensin 1-7, a vasodilator. Reduced ACE2 expression, common in diabetes, intensifies RAS activity, contributing to conditions like inflammation and fibrosis. Although ACE inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers can be therapeutically beneficial by increasing ACE2 levels, concerns arise regarding the potential elevation of ACE2 receptors on cell membranes, potentially facilitating COVID-19 entry. This review explored the role of the RAS/ACE2 mechanism in amplifying severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection and associated complications in T2DM. Potential treatment strategies, including recombinant human ACE2 therapy, broad-spectrum antiviral drugs, and epigenetic signature detection, are discussed as promising avenues in the battle against this pandemic.

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.

Effects of Antihypertensive Agents on the Clinical Outcome of Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients Concomitant with Hypertension: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Given the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, it is crucial to prioritize the management of underlying diseases in infected patients, with hypertension being one of the most common conditions. However, there lies a complicated correlation between antihypertensive agents and COVID-19 infection.

OBJECTIVES

This study is to systematically evaluate the impact of continuing or discontinuing antihypertensive agents on mortality and infection severity in hospitalized patients with both hypertension and COVID-19.

METHODS

A systematic electronic search was conducted on PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov to identify relevant clinical trials published between 1948 and September 2022. Two independent reviewers assessed the quality of the included studies and extracted relevant data. The primary outcome of interest was the relationship between in-hospital mortality and administration of antihypertensive agents.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis revealed that continuous administration of antihypertensive agents, compared with discontinuation, significantly reduced in-hospital mortality among hypertension patients with COVID-19 infection [OR=0.49, 95 %CI (0.38, 0.65), p < 0.001, I2=65.3 %]. Specifically, patients receiving ACEI/ARB type agents had even lower mortality rates. Meta-regression analyses were conducted to examine the impact of publication date, sample size, study design, and mean age of the patients, and the results showed that the number of participants in the included studies was the primary source of heterogeneity (p = 0.032). The findings indicated a clear association between the use of antihypertensive agents and reduced mortality in these patients.

CONCLUSION

nder the current circumstance of the sustained COVID-19 pandemic, it is recommended to continue the use of antihypertensive agents for patients with hypertension during COVID-19 infection, as it can help reduce the risk of mortality.

Renal safety and survival among acutely ill hospitalized patients treated by blockers of the Renin-Angiotensin axis or loop diuretics: a single-center retrospective analysis

BACKGROUND

Concern exists regarding the renal safety of blocking the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) during acute illness, especially in the presence of volume depletion and hemodynamic instability.

METHODS

We explored the impact of loop diuretics and RAS blockers on the likelihood of developing acute kidney injury (AKI) or acute kidney functional recovery (AKR) among inpatients. Adjusted odds ratio for AKI, AKR and mortality was calculated, using logistic regression models, with subgroup analysis for patients with estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <30 ml/min/1.73 m2, corrected for blood pressure measurements.

RESULTS

53,289 patients were included. RAS blockade was associated with reduced adjusted odds ratio for both AKI (0.76, CI 0.70-0.83) AKR (0.55, 0.52-0.58), and mortality within 30 days (0.44, 0.41-0.48), whereas loop diuretics were associated with increased risk of AKI (3.75, 3.42-4.12) and mortality (1.71, 1.58-1.85) and reduced AKR (0.71, 0.66-0.75). Comparable impact of RAS blockers and loop diuretics on renal outcomes and death was found among 6,069 patients with eGFR < 30 ml/min/1.73m2. RAS inhibition and diuretics tended to increase the adjusted odds ratios for AKI and to reduce the likelihood of AKR in hypotensive patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Reduced blood pressure, RAS blockers and diuretics affect the odds of developing AKI or AKR among inpatients, suggesting possible disruption in renal functional reserve (RFR). As long as blood pressure is maintained, RAS inhibition seems to be safe and renoprotective in this population, irrespective of kidney function upon admission, and is associated with reduced mortality.

Incidence of New-Onset Hypertension Post-COVID-19: Comparison With Influenza

BACKGROUND

SARS-CoV-2 may trigger new-onset persistent hypertension. This study investigated the incidence and risk factors associated with new-onset persistent hypertension during COVID-19 hospitalization and at ≈6-month follow-up compared with influenza.

METHODS

This retrospective observational study was conducted in a major academic health system in New York City. Participants included 45 398 patients with COVID-19 (March 2020 to August 2022) and 13 864 influenza patients (January 2018 to August 2022) without a history of hypertension.

RESULTS

At 6-month follow-up, new-onset persistent hypertension was seen in 20.6% of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and 10.85% of nonhospitalized patients with COVID-19. Persistent hypertension incidence among hospitalized patients did not vary across the pandemic, whereas that of hospitalized patients decreased from 20% in March 2020 to ≈10% in October 2020 (R2=0.79, P=0.003) and then plateaued thereafter. Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were 2.23 ([95% CI, 1.48-3.54]; P<0.001) times and nonhospitalized patients with COVID-19 were 1.52 ([95% CI, 1.22-1.90]; P<0.01) times more likely to develop persistent hypertension than influenza counterparts. Persistent hypertension was more common among older adults, males, Black, patients with preexisting comorbidities (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, coronary artery disease, chronic kidney disease), and those who were treated with pressor and corticosteroid medications. Mathematical models predicted persistent hypertension with 79% to 86% accuracy. In addition, 21.0% of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 with no prior hypertension developed hypertension during COVID-19 hospitalization.

CONCLUSIONS

Incidence of new-onset persistent hypertension in patients with COVID-19 is higher than those with influenza, likely constituting a major health burden given the sheer number of patients with COVID-19. Screening at-risk patients for hypertension following COVID-19 illness may be warranted.

Long-term outcomes of COVID-19 survivors with hospital AKI: association with time to recovery from AKI

BACKGROUND

Although coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients who develop in-hospital acute kidney injury (AKI) have worse short-term outcomes, their long-term outcomes have not been fully characterized. We investigated 90-day and 1-year outcomes after hospital AKI grouped by time to recovery from AKI.

METHODS

This study consisted of 3296 COVID-19 patients with hospital AKI stratified by early recovery (<48 hours), delayed recovery (2-7 days) and prolonged recovery (>7-90 days). Demographics, comorbidities and laboratory values were obtained at admission and up to the 1-year follow-up. The incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and major adverse kidney events (MAKE), rehospitalization, recurrent AKI and new-onset chronic kidney disease (CKD) were obtained 90-days after COVID-19 discharge.

RESULTS

The incidence of hospital AKI was 28.6%. Of the COVID-19 patients with AKI, 58.0% experienced early recovery, 14.8% delayed recovery and 27.1% prolonged recovery. Patients with a longer AKI recovery time had a higher prevalence of CKD (P < .05) and were more likely to need invasive mechanical ventilation (P < .001) and to die (P < .001). Many COVID-19 patients developed MAKE, recurrent AKI and new-onset CKD within 90 days, and these incidences were higher in the prolonged recovery group (P < .05). The incidence of MACE peaked 20-40 days postdischarge, whereas MAKE peaked 80-90 days postdischarge. Logistic regression models predicted 90-day MACE and MAKE with 82.4 ± 1.6% and 79.6 ± 2.3% accuracy, respectively.

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 survivors who developed hospital AKI are at high risk for adverse cardiovascular and kidney outcomes, especially those with longer AKI recovery times and those with a history of CKD. These patients may require long-term follow-up for cardiac and kidney complications.

Discontinuation of Antihypertensive Drug Use Compared to Continuation in COVID-19 Patients: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis

INTRODUCTION

COVID-19 related mortality is about 2%, and it increases with comorbidities, like hypertension. Regarding management, there is debatable evidence about the benefits of continuation vs. discontinuation of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers (ACEI/ARB).

AIM

We performed a systematic review to assess the effects and safety of in-hospital discontinuation compared to continuation of ACEI/ARB in COVID-19 patients.

METHODS

We systematically searched on PubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE from inception to June 19, 2021. We included observational studies and trials that compared the effects and safety of continuing ACEI/ARB compared to discontinuing it in COVID-19 patients. Effects sizes for dichotomous variables were expressed as risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals. For continuous variables, effects were expressed as mean difference (MD). We used random effect models with the inverse variance method. We assessed certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach.

RESULTS

We included three open-label randomized controlled trials and five cohort studies. We found that the continuation group had lower risk of death compared with the discontinuation group only in the cohort group (RR: 0.46, 95% CI: 0.24-0.90), but not in the RCT group (RR: 1.22, 95% CI: 0.75-2.00). The ICU admission rate was significantly lower in the continuation group (RR: 0.46, 95% CI: 0.31-0.68) in the cohort group, but not in RCT group (RR: 1.03, 95% CI: 0.67-1.59). We did not find significant differences between groups regarding hospitalization length, hypotension, AKI needing renal replacement therapy, mechanical ventilation, new or worsening heart failure, myocarditis, renal replacement therapy, arrhythmias, thromboembolic events and SOFA AUC. The GRADE approach revealed that the certainty ranged from moderate to high level.

CONCLUSIONS

There is no significant difference in mortality and other outcomes between continuation and discontinuation groups.

Longitudinal Chest X-ray Scores and their Relations with Clinical Variables and Outcomes in COVID-19 Patients

Background: This study evaluated the temporal characteristics of lung chest X-ray (CXR) scores in COVID-19 patients during hospitalization and how they relate to other clinical variables and outcomes (alive or dead). Methods: This is a retrospective study of COVID-19 patients. CXR scores of disease severity were analyzed for: (i) survivors (N = 224) versus non-survivors (N = 28) in the general floor group, and (ii) survivors (N = 92) versus non-survivors (N = 56) in the invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) group. Unpaired t-tests were used to compare survivors and non-survivors and between time points. Comparison across multiple time points used repeated measures ANOVA and corrected for multiple comparisons. Results: For general-floor patients, non-survivor CXR scores were significantly worse at admission compared to those of survivors (p < 0.05), and non-survivor CXR scores deteriorated at outcome (p < 0.05) whereas survivor CXR scores did not (p > 0.05). For IMV patients, survivor and non-survivor CXR scores were similar at intubation (p > 0.05), and both improved at outcome (p < 0.05), with survivor scores showing greater improvement (p < 0.05). Hospitalization and IMV duration were not different between groups (p > 0.05). CXR scores were significantly correlated with lactate dehydrogenase, respiratory rate, D-dimer, C-reactive protein, procalcitonin, ferritin, SpO2, and lymphocyte count (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Longitudinal CXR scores have the potential to provide prognosis, guide treatment, and monitor disease progression.

Treating COVID-19: Targeting the Host Response, Not the Virus

In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), inexpensive generic drugs like statins, ACE inhibitors, and ARBs, especially if used in combination, might be the only practical way to save the lives of patients with severe COVID-19. These drugs will already be available in all countries on the first pandemic day. Because they target the host response to infection instead of the virus, they could be used to save lives during any pandemic. Observational studies show that inpatient statin treatment reduces 28–30-day mortality but randomized controlled trials have failed to show this benefit. Combination treatment has been tested for antivirals and dexamethasone but, with the exception of one observational study in Belgium, not for inexpensive generic drugs. Future pandemic research must include testing combination generic drug treatments that could be used in LMICs.

Longitudinal medical subspecialty follow-up of critically and non-critically ill hospitalized COVID-19 survivors up to 24 months after discharge

Medical specialty usage of COVID-19 survivors after hospital discharge is poorly understood. This study investigated medical specialty usage at 1-12 and 13-24 months post-hospital discharge in critically ill and non-critically ill COVID-19 survivors. This retrospective study followed ICU (N = 89) and non-ICU (N = 205) COVID-19 survivors who returned for follow-up within the Stony Brook Health System post-hospital discharge. Follow-up data including survival, hospital readmission, ongoing symptoms, medical specialty care use, and ICU status were examined 1-12 and 13-24 months after COVID-19 discharge. "New" (not previously seen) medical specialty usage was also identified. Essentially all (98%) patients survived. Hospital readmission was 34%, but functional status scores at discharge were not associated with hospital readmission. Many patients reported ongoing [neuromuscular (50%) respiratory (39%), chronic fatigue (35%), cardiovascular (30%), gastrointestinal (28%), neurocognitive (22%), genitourinary (22%), and mood-related (13%)] symptoms at least once 1-24 months after discharge. Common specialty follow-ups included cardiology (25%), vascular medicine (17%), urology (17%), neurology (16%), and pulmonology (14%), with some associated with pre-existing comorbidities and with COVID-19. Common new specialty visits were vascular medicine (11%), pulmonology (11%), and neurology (9%). ICU patients had more symptoms and follow-ups compared to the non-ICU patients. This study reported high incidence of persistent symptoms and medical specialty care needs in hospitalized COVID-19 survivors 1-24 months post-discharge. Some specialty care needs were COVID-19 related or exacerbated by COVID-19 disease while others were associated with pre-existing medical conditions. Longer follow-up studies of COVID-19 survivor medical care needs are necessary.

Counter-regulatory renin-angiotensin system in hypertension: Review and update in the era of COVID-19 pandemic

Cardiovascular disease is the major cause of mortality and disability, with hypertension being the most prevalent risk factor. Excessive activation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) under pathological conditions, leading to vascular remodeling and inflammation, is closely related to cardiovascular dysfunction. The counter-regulatory axis of the RAS consists of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), angiotensin (1-7), angiotensin (1-9), alamandine, proto-oncogene Mas receptor, angiotensin II type-2 receptor and Mas-related G protein-coupled receptor member D. Each of these components has been shown to counteract the effects of the overactivated RAS. In this review, we summarize the latest insights into the complexity and interplay of the counter-regulatory RAS axis in hypertension, highlight the pathophysiological functions of ACE2, a multifunctional molecule linking hypertension and COVID-19, and discuss the function and therapeutic potential of targeting this counter-regulatory RAS axis to prevent and treat hypertension in the context of the current COVID-19 pandemic.

Hypertension and mortality in SARS-COV-2 infection: A meta-analysis of observational studies after 2 years of pandemic

BACKGROUND

The worldwide pandemic SARS-CoV-2 infection is associated with clinical course including a very broad spectrum of clinical manifestations, including death. Several studies and meta-analyses have evaluated the role of hypertension on prognosis, but with important limitations and conflicting results. Therefore, we decided to perform a new meta-analysis of the observational studies that explored the relationship between pre-existing hypertension and mortality risk in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection, using more stringent inclusion criteria to overcome the limitations inherent previous meta-analyses.

METHODS

A systematic search of the on-line databases available up to 31 March 2022 was conducted, including peer-reviewed original articles, involving the adult population, where the role of hypertension on mortality due to SARS-CoV-2 infection was determined by Cox-proportional hazard models. Pooled hazard ratio (HR) was calculated by a random effect model. Sensitivity, heterogeneity, publication bias, subgroup and meta-regression analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Twenty-six studies (222,083 participants) met the pre-defined inclusion criteria. In the pooled analysis, pre-existing hypertension was significantly associated with mortality due to SARS-CoV-2 infection, both in unadjusted and adjusted models (HR: 1.55; 95% CI: 1.22 to 1.97). However, in separate analyses including results adjusted for crucial and strong predictors of mortality during SARS-CoV-2 infection (e.g. body weight), the association disappeared.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this meta-analysis indicate that pre-existing hypertension is not an independent predictor of mortality during SARS-CoV-2 infection. Further studies should nevertheless be carried out worldwide to evaluate this role, independent of, or in interaction with, other confounders that may affect the mortality risk.

Effect of continuing the use of renin-angiotensin system inhibitors on mortality in patients hospitalized for coronavirus disease 2019: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression analysis

BACKGROUND

The effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs)/angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) on mortality was preliminarily explored through the comparison of ACEIs/ARBs with non-ACEIs/ARBs in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Reaching a conclusion on whether previous ACEI/ARB treatment should be continued in view of the different ACE2 levels in the comparison groups was not unimpeachable. Therefore, this study aimed to further elucidate the effect of ACEI/ARB continuation on hospital mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) in the same patient population.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Ovid, and Embase for relevant articles published between December 1, 2019 and April 30, 2022. Continuation of ACEI/ARB use after hospitalization due to COVID-19 was considered as an exposure and discontinuation of ACEI/ARB considered as a control. The primary outcome was hospital mortality, and the secondary outcomes included 30-day mortality, rate of ICU admission, IMV, and other clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

Seven observational studies and four randomized controlled trials involving 2823 patients were included. The pooled hospital mortality in the continuation group (13.04%, 158/1212) was significantly lower than that (22.15%, 278/1255) in the discontinuation group (risk ratio [RR] = 0.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.28-0.72; P = 0.001). Continuation of ACEI/ARB use was associated with lower rates of ICU admission (10.5% versus 16.2%, RR = 0.63; 95% CI 0.5-0.79; P < 0.0001) and IMV (8.2% versus 12.5%, RR = 0.62; 95% CI 0.46-0.83, P = 0.001). Nevertheless, the effect was mainly demonstrated in the observational study subgroup (P < 0.05). Continuing ACEI/ARB had no significant effect on 30-day mortality (P = 0.34), acute myocardial infarction (P = 0.08), heart failure (P = 0.82), and acute kidney injury after hospitalization (P = 0.98).

CONCLUSION

Previous ACEI/ARB treatment could be continued since it was associated with lower hospital deaths, ICU admission, and IMV in patients with COVID-19, although the benefits of continuing use were mainly shown in observational studies. More evidence from multicenter RCTs are still needed to increase the robustness of the data. Trial registration PROSPERO (CRD42022341169). Registered 27 June 2022.

Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging of COVID-19-Associated Cardiac Sequelae: A Systematic Review

Background

Many COVID-19 survivors experience persistent COVID-19 related cardiac abnormalities weeks to months after recovery from acute SARS-CoV-2 infection. Non-invasive cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging is an important tool of choice for clinical diagnosis of cardiac dysfunctions. In this systematic review, we analyzed the CMR findings and biomarkers of COVID-19 related cardiac sequela after SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Methods

Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA), we conducted a systematic review of studies that assessed COVID-19 related cardiac abnormalities using cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging. A total of 21 cross-sectional, case-control, and cohort studies were included in the analyses.

Results

Ten studies reported CMR results < 3 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection and 11 studies > 3 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Abnormal T1, abnormal T2, elevated extracellular volume, late gadolinium enhancement and myocarditis was reported less frequently in the > 3-month studies. Eight studies reported an association between biomarkers and CMR findings. Elevated troponin was associated with CMR pathology in 5/6 studies, C-reactive protein in 3/5 studies, N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide in 1/2 studies, and lactate dehydrogenase and D-dimer in a single study. The rate of myocarditis via CMR was 18% (154/868) across all studies. Most SARS-CoV-2 associated CMR abnormalities resolved over time.

Conclusions

There were CMR abnormalities associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection and most abnormalities resolved over time. A panel of cardiac injury and inflammatory biomarkers could be useful in identifying patients who are likely to present with abnormal CMR pathology after COVID-19. Multiple mechanisms are likely responsible for COVID-19 induced cardiac abnormalities.

Deep learning of longitudinal chest X-ray and clinical variables predicts duration on ventilator and mortality in COVID-19 patients

Objectives

To use deep learning of serial portable chest X-ray (pCXR) and clinical variables to predict mortality and duration on invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) for Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients.

Methods

This is a retrospective study. Serial pCXR and serial clinical variables were analyzed for data from day 1, day 5, day 1–3, day 3–5, or day 1–5 on IMV (110 IMV survivors and 76 IMV non-survivors). The outcome variables were duration on IMV and mortality. With fivefold cross-validation, the performance of the proposed deep learning system was evaluated by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis and correlation analysis.

Results

Predictive models using 5-consecutive-day data outperformed those using 3-consecutive-day and 1-day data. Prediction using data closer to the outcome was generally better (i.e., day 5 data performed better than day 1 data, and day 3–5 data performed better than day 1–3 data). Prediction performance was generally better for the combined pCXR and non-imaging clinical data than either alone. The combined pCXR and non-imaging data of 5 consecutive days predicted mortality with an accuracy of 85 ± 3.5% (95% confidence interval (CI)) and an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.87 ± 0.05 (95% CI) and predicted the duration needed to be on IMV to within 2.56 ± 0.21 (95% CI) days on the validation dataset.

Conclusions

Deep learning of longitudinal pCXR and clinical data have the potential to accurately predict mortality and duration on IMV in COVID-19 patients. Longitudinal pCXR could have prognostic value if these findings can be validated in a large, multi-institutional cohort.

Drugs acting on the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) and deaths of COVID-19 patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

BACKGROUND

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are two of the most commonly used antihypertensive drugs acting on the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS). Previous research has shown that RAAS inhibitors increase the expression of angiotensin-converting enzyme, a cellular receptor for the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, raising concerns that the use of ACEi and ARBs in hypertensive patients may increase COVID-19 patient mortality. Therefore, the main aim of the current study was to find out the role of drugs acting on RAAS, particularly ACEi/ARBs in the deaths of COVID-19 patients.

RESULTS

In total, 68 studies were found to be appropriate, reporting a total of 128,078 subjects. The odds ratio was found to be 1.14 [0.95, 1.36], which indicates the non-significant association of ACEi/ARBs with mortality of COVID-19 patients. Further, the association of individual ACEi/ARBs with mortality of COVID-19 patients was also found non-significant. The sensitivity analysis results have shown no significant effect of outliers on the outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on available evidence, ACEi/ARB were not significantly associated with deaths of COVID-19 patients.

Long-short-term memory machine learning of longitudinal clinical data accurately predicts acute kidney injury onset in COVID-19: a two-center study

OBJECTIVES

This study used the long-short-term memory (LSTM) artificial intelligence method to model multiple time points of clinical laboratory data, along with demographics and comorbidities, to predict hospital-acquired acute kidney injury (AKI) onset in patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

Montefiore Health System data consisted of 1982 AKI and 2857 non-AKI (NAKI) hospitalized patients with COVID-19, and Stony Brook Hospital validation data consisted of 308 AKI and 721 NAKI hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Demographic, comorbidities, and longitudinal (3 days before AKI onset) laboratory tests were analyzed. LSTM was used to predict AKI with fivefold cross-validation (80%/20% for training/validation).

RESULTS

The top predictors of AKI onset were glomerular filtration rate, lactate dehydrogenase, alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, and C-reactive protein. Longitudinal data yielded marked improvement in prediction accuracy over individual time points. The inclusion of comorbidities and demographics further improves prediction accuracy. The best model yielded an area under the curve, accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity to be 0.965 ± 0.003, 89.57 ± 1.64%, 0.95 ± 0.03, and 0.84 ± 0.05, respectively, for the Montefiore validation dataset, and 0.86 ± 0.01, 83.66 ± 2.53%, 0.66 ± 0.10, 0.89 ± 0.03, respectively, for the Stony Brook Hospital validation dataset.

CONCLUSION

LSTM model of longitudinal clinical data accurately predicted AKI onset in patients with COVID-19. This approach could help heighten awareness of AKI complications and identify patients for early interventions to prevent long-term renal complications.

Understanding the pivotal roles of ACE2 in SARS-CoV-2 infection: from structure/function to therapeutic implication

In December 2019, a novel respiratory tract infection, from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), was detected in China that rapidly spread around the world. This virus possesses spike (S) glycoproteins on the surface of mature virions, like other members of coronaviridae. The S glycoprotein is a crucial viral protein for binding, fusion, and entry into the target cells. Binding the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of S protein to angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE 2), a cell-surface receptor, mediates virus entry into cells; thus, understanding the basics of ACE2 and S protein, their interactions, and ACE2 targeting could be a potent priority for inhibition of virus infection. This review presents current knowledge of the SARS-CoV-2 basics and entry mechanism, structure and organ distribution of ACE2, and also its function in SARS-CoV-2 entry and pathogenesis. Furthermore, it highlights ACE2 targeting by recombinant ACE2 (rACE2), ACE2 activators, ACE inhibitor, and angiotensin II (Ang II) receptor blocker to control the SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone Inhibitors and COVID-19 Infection

Purpose of Review

This review summarises the literature data and provides an overview of the role and impact of the use of renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection.

Recent Findings

The angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) has a key role in the regulation of the RAAS pathway, downregulating angiotensin II and attenuating inflammation, vasoconstriction and oxidative stress. Additionally, it plays an instrumental part in COVID-19 infection as it facilitates the cell entry of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and enables its replication. The use and role of RAAS inhibitors therefore during the COVID-19 pandemic have been intensively investigated.

Summary

Although it was initially assumed that RAAS inhibitors may relate to worse clinical outcomes and severe disease, data from large studies and meta-analyses demonstrated that they do not have an adverse impact on clinical outcomes or prognosis. On the contrary, some experimental and retrospective observational cohort studies showed a potential protective mechanism, although this effect remains to be seen in large clinical trials.

Renin-Angiotensin-System Inhibitors Are Associated With Lower In-hospital Mortality in COVID-19 Patients Aged 80 and Older

Background

Older adults are at higher risk of morbidity and mortality for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Renin-angiotensin-system inhibitors (RASi) were found to have a neutral or protective effect against mortality in COVID-19 adult patients.

Aims

We investigated whether this association was confirmed also in COVID-19 older patients.

Methods

This is a prospective observational study on 337 hospitalized older adults (aged 80 years and older). We classified the study population according to usage of RASi before and during hospitalization. A propensity score analysis was also performed to confirm the findings.

Results

The mean age was 87.4 ± 6.1 years. Patients taking RASi at home were 147 (43.6%). During hospitalization, 38 patients (11.3% of the entire study population) discontinued RASi, while 57 patients (16.9% of the entire study population) started RASi. In-hospital mortality was 43.9%. Patients taking RASi during hospitalization (patients who maintained their home RASi therapy + patients who started RASi during hospitalization) had a significantly lower in-hospital mortality than untreated patients [HR 0.48 (95% CI: 0.34–0.67)], even after adjustment for required respiratory support, functional status, albumin, inflammation, and cardiac biomarkers. The analysis of the groups derived from the “propensity score matching” (58 patients in each group) confirmed these results [HR 0.46 (95% CI: 0.23–0.91)].

Discussion

Despite the high risk of death in older COVID-19 patients, RASi therapy during hospitalization was associated with a clinically relevant lower in-hospital mortality, likely due to the benefit of RAS modulation on the cardiopulmonary system during the acute phase of the disease.

Conclusion

Our findings confirm the protective role of RASi even in COVID-19 patients aged 80 years and older.

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.

Effectiveness and Safety of Regdanvimab in Patients With Mild-To-Moderate COVID-19: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Regdanvimab has decreased the time to clinical recovery from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and lowered the rate of oxygen therapy according to the results from phase 2/3 randomized controlled trial. More information is needed about the effects and safety of regdanvimab.

METHODS

We analyzed data for patients with high-risk mild or moderate COVID-19 being admitted to Busan Medical Center between December 1, 2020 and April 16, 2021. A propensity score (PS) matched analysis was conducted to compare patients treated with and without regdanvimab. The primary outcome was in-hospital death or disease aggravation which means the need for oxygen therapy (low- or high-flow oxygen therapy and mechanical ventilation) and secondary outcomes comprised the length of hospital stay and adverse reactions.

RESULTS

Among 1,617 selected patients, 970 (60.0%) were indicated for regdanvimab. Of these, 377 (38.9%) were administered with regdanvimab. Among a 1:1 PS-matched cohort of 377 patients each treated with and without regdanvimab, 19 (5%) and 81 (21.5%) reached the composite outcome of death, or disease aggravation, respectively (absolute risk difference, -16.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI], -21.1, -11.7; relative risk difference, 76.5%; P < 0.001). Regdanvimab significantly reduced the composite outcome of death, or disease aggravation in univariate (odds ratio [OR], 0.194; 95% CI, 0.112-0.320; P < 0.001) and multivariable-adjusted analyses (OR, 0.169; 95% CI, 0.095-0.289; P < 0.001). The hospital stay was shorter for the group with than without regdanvimab. Some hematological adverse reactions were more frequent in the group without regdanvimab, but other adverse reactions did not significantly differ between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Regdanvimab was associated with a significantly lower risk of disease aggravation without increasing adverse reactions.

Chronic use of renin–angiotensin–aldosterone inhibitors in hypertensive COVID-19 patients: Results from a Spanish registry and meta-analysis

Background

Hypertension is a prevalent condition among SARS-CoV-2 infected patients. Whether renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors are beneficial or harmful is controversial.

Methods

We have performed a national retrospective, nonexperimental comparative study from two tertiary hospitals to evaluate the impact of chronic use of RAAS inhibitors in hypertensive COVID-19 patients. A meta-analysis was performed to strengthen our findings.

Results

Of 849 patients, 422 (49.7%) patients were hypertensive and 310 (73.5%) were taking RAAS inhibitors at baseline. Hypertensive patients were older, had more comorbidities, and a greater incidence of respiratory failure (−0.151 [95% CI −0.218, −0.084]). Overall mortality in hypertensive patients was 28.4%, but smaller among those with prescribed RAAS inhibitors before (−0.167 [95% CI −0.220, −0.114]) and during hospitalization (0.090 [−0.008,0.188]). Similar findings were observed after two propensity score matches that evaluated the benefit of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers among hypertensive patients. Multivariate logistic regression analysis of hypertensive patients found that age, diabetes mellitus, C-reactive protein, and renal failure were independently associated with all-cause mortality. On the contrary, ACEIs decreased the risk of death (OR 0.444 [95% CI 0.224–0.881]). Meta-analysis suggested a protective benefit of RAAS inhibitors (OR 0.6 [95% CI 0.42–0.8]) among hypertensive COVID-19.

Conclusion

Our data suggest that RAAS inhibitors may play a protective role in hypertensive COVID-19 patients. This finding was supported by a meta-analysis of the current evidence. Maintaining these medications during hospital stay may not negatively affect COVID-19 outcomes.

Angiotensin II Type I Receptor (AT1R): The Gate towards COVID-19-Associated Diseases

The binding of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spike glycoprotein to its cellular receptor, the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), causes its downregulation, which subsequently leads to the dysregulation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) in favor of the ACE-angiotensin II (Ang II)-angiotensin II type I receptor (AT1R) axis. AT1R has a major role in RAS by being involved in several physiological events including blood pressure control and electrolyte balance. Following SARS-CoV-2 infection, pathogenic episodes generated by the vasoconstriction, proinflammatory, profibrotic, and prooxidative consequences of the Ang II-AT1R axis activation are accompanied by a hyperinflammatory state (cytokine storm) and an acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). AT1R, a member of the G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) family, modulates Ang II deleterious effects through the activation of multiple downstream signaling pathways, among which are MAP kinases (ERK 1/2, JNK, p38MAPK), receptor tyrosine kinases (PDGF, EGFR, insulin receptor), and nonreceptor tyrosine kinases (Src, JAK/STAT, focal adhesion kinase (FAK)), and nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate (NADPH) oxidase. COVID-19 is well known for generating respiratory symptoms, but because ACE2 is expressed in various body tissues, several extrapulmonary pathologies are also manifested, including neurologic disorders, vasculature and myocardial complications, kidney injury, gastrointestinal symptoms, hepatic injury, hyperglycemia, and dermatologic complications. Therefore, the development of drugs based on RAS blockers, such as angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs), that inhibit the damaging axis of the RAS cascade may become one of the most promising approaches for the treatment of COVID-19 in the near future. We herein review the general features of AT1R, with a special focus on the receptor-mediated activation of the different downstream signaling pathways leading to specific cellular responses. In addition, we provide the latest insights into the roles of AT1R in COVID-19 outcomes in different systems of the human body, as well as the role of ARBs as tentative pharmacological agents to treat COVID-19.

Outcomes of Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19 With Acute Kidney Injury and Acute Cardiac Injury

Purpose

This study investigated the incidence, disease course, risk factors, and mortality in COVID-19 patients who developed both acute kidney injury (AKI) and acute cardiac injury (ACI), and compared to those with AKI only, ACI only, and no injury (NI).

Methods

This retrospective study consisted of hospitalized COVID-19 patients at Montefiore Health System in Bronx, New York between March 11, 2020 and January 29, 2021. Demographics, comorbidities, vitals, and laboratory tests were collected during hospitalization. Predictive models were used to predict AKI, ACI, and AKI-ACI onset. Longitudinal laboratory tests were analyzed with time-lock to discharge alive or death.

Results

Of the 5,896 hospitalized COVID-19 patients, 44, 19, 9, and 28% had NI, AKI, ACI, and AKI-ACI, respectively. Most ACI presented very early (within a day or two) during hospitalization in contrast to AKI (p < 0.05). Patients with combined AKI-ACI were significantly older, more often men and had more comorbidities, and higher levels of cardiac, kidney, liver, inflammatory, and immunological markers compared to those of the AKI, ACI, and NI groups. The adjusted hospital-mortality odds ratios were 17.1 [95% CI = 13.6–21.7, p < 0.001], 7.2 [95% CI = 5.4–9.6, p < 0.001], and 4.7 [95% CI = 3.7–6.1, p < 0.001] for AKI-ACI, ACI, and AKI, respectively, relative to NI. A predictive model of AKI-ACI onset using top predictors yielded 97% accuracy. Longitudinal laboratory data predicted mortality of AKI-ACI patients up to 5 days prior to outcome, with an area-under-the-curve, ranging from 0.68 to 0.89.

Conclusions

COVID-19 patients with AKI-ACI had markedly worse outcomes compared to those only AKI, ACI and NI. Common laboratory variables accurately predicted AKI-ACI. The ability to identify patients at risk for AKI-ACI could lead to earlier intervention and improvement in clinical outcomes.

Drugs Modulating Renin-Angiotensin System in COVID-19 Treatment

A massive worldwide vaccination campaign constitutes the main tool against the COVID-19 pandemic. However, drug treatments are also necessary. Antivirals are the most frequently considered treatments. However, strategies targeting mechanisms involved in disease aggravation may also be effective. A major role of the tissue renin-angiotensin system (RAS) in the pathophysiology and severity of COVID-19 has been suggested. The main link between RAS and COVID-19 is angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), a central RAS component and the primary binding site for SARS-CoV-2 that facilitates the virus entry into host cells. An initial suggestion that the susceptibility to infection and disease severity may be enhanced by angiotensin type-1 receptor blockers (ARBs) and ACE inhibitors (ACEIs) because they increase ACE2 levels, led to the consideration of discontinuing treatments in thousands of patients. More recent experimental and clinical data indicate that ACEIs and, particularly, ARBs can be beneficial for COVID-19 outcome, both by reducing inflammatory responses and by triggering mechanisms (such as ADAM17 inhibition) counteracting viral entry. Strategies directly activating RAS anti-inflammatory components such as soluble ACE2, Angiotensin 1-7 analogues, and Mas or AT2 receptor agonists may also be beneficial. However, while ACEIs and ARBs are cheap and widely used, the second type of strategies are currently under study.

Systemic Inflammation May Induce Cardiac Injury in COVID-19 Patients Including Children and Adolescents Without Underlying Cardiovascular Diseases: A Systematic Review

Coronavirus disease 2019(COVID-19) is an ongoing global pandemic with a daily increasing number of affected individuals and a relatively high mortality rate. COVID-19 patients that develop cardiac injury are at increased risk of a worse clinical course with higher rates of mortality. Increasing amounts of evidence suggest that a system-wide inflammatory response and a cytokine storm mediated type syndrome plays a crucial role in disease progression. This systematic review investigates the possible role of hyperinflammation in inducing cardiac injury as one of the severe complications of COVID-19. A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, Embase and Scopus databases to identify relevant clinical studies that investigated cardiovascular injury manifestations and reported inflammatory and cardiac biomarkers in COVID-19 patients. Only 29 studies met our inclusion criteria and the majority of these studies demonstrated significantly elevated inflammatory and cardiac blood markers. It was evident that underlying cardiovascular diseases may increase the risk of developing cardiac injury. However, many COVID-19 patients included in this review, developed different types of cardiac injury without having any underlying cardiovascular diseases. Furthermore, many of these patients were either children or adolescents. Therefore, age and comorbidities may not always be the two main risk factors that dictate the severity and outcome of COVID-19. Further investigations are required to understand the underlying mechanisms of pathogenicity as an urgent requirement to develop the appropriate treatment and prevention strategies. These strategies may specifically target hyperinflammation as a suspected driving factor for some of the severe complications of COVID-19.

The Effects of Different Classes of Antihypertensive Drugs on Patients with COVID-19 and Hypertension: A Mini-Review

Hypertension is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease. Previous studies showed that patients with hypertension are at an increased risk of developing severe COVID-19 infection. Therefore, proper blood pressure control in hypertensive patients with COVID-19 is of great importance. In this review, we discussed the effects of different classes of antihypertensive drugs on patients with hypertension and COVID-19.

Mortality and Severity in COVID-19 Patients on ACEIs and ARBs-A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Meta-Regression Analysis

Purpose: The primary objective of this systematic review is to assess association of mortality in COVID-19 patients on Angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and Angiotensin-II receptor blockers (ARBs). A secondary objective is to assess associations with higher severity of the disease in COVID-19 patients. Materials and Methods: We searched multiple COVID-19 databases (WHO, CDC, LIT-COVID) for longitudinal studies globally reporting mortality and severity published before January 18th, 2021. Meta-analyses were performed using 53 studies for mortality outcome and 43 for the severity outcome. Mantel-Haenszel odds ratios were generated to describe overall effect size using random effect models. To account for between study results variations, multivariate meta-regression was performed with preselected covariates using maximum likelihood method for both the mortality and severity models. Result: Our findings showed that the use of ACEIs/ARBs did not significantly influence either mortality (OR = 1.16 95% CI 0.94-1.44, p = 0.15, I 2 = 93.2%) or severity (OR = 1.18, 95% CI 0.94-1.48, p = 0.15, I 2 = 91.1%) in comparison to not being on ACEIs/ARBs in COVID-19 positive patients. Multivariate meta-regression for the mortality model demonstrated that 36% of between study variations could be explained by differences in age, gender, and proportion of heart diseases in the study samples. Multivariate meta-regression for the severity model demonstrated that 8% of between study variations could be explained by differences in age, proportion of diabetes, heart disease and study country in the study samples. Conclusion: We found no association of mortality or severity in COVID-19 patients taking ACEIs/ARBs.

Longitudinal prediction of hospital-acquired acute kidney injury in COVID-19: a two-center study

BACKGROUND

To investigate the temporal characteristics of clinical variables of hospital-acquired acute kidney injury (AKI) in COVID-19 patients and to longitudinally predict AKI onset.

METHODS

There were 308 hospital-acquired AKI and 721 non-AKI (NAKI) COVID-19 patients from Stony Brook Hospital (New York, USA) data, and 72 hospital-acquired AKI and 303 NAKI COVID-19 patients from Tongji Hospital (Wuhan, China). Demographic, comorbidities, and longitudinal (3 days before and 3 days after AKI onset) clinical variables were used to compute odds ratios for and longitudinally predict hospital-acquired AKI onset.

RESULTS

COVID-19 patients with AKI were more likely to die than NAKI patients (31.5% vs 6.9%, adjusted p < 0.001, OR = 4.67 [95% CI 3.1, 7.0], Stony Brook data). AKI developed on average 3.3 days after hospitalization. Procalcitonin was elevated prior to AKI onset (p < 0.05), peaked, and remained elevated (p < 0.05). Alanine aminotransferase, aspartate transaminase, ferritin, and lactate dehydrogenase peaked the same time as creatinine, whereas D-dimer and brain natriuretic peptide peaked a day later. C-reactive protein, white blood cell and lymphocyte showed group differences - 2 days prior (p < 0.05). Top predictors were creatinine, procalcitonin, white blood cells, lactate dehydrogenase, and lymphocytes. They predicted AKI onset with areas under curves (AUCs) of 0.78, 0.66, and 0.56 at 0, - 1, and - 2 days prior, respectively. When tested on the Tongji Hospital data, the AUCs were 0.80, 0.79, and 0.77, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Time-locked longitudinal data provide insight into AKI progression. Commonly clinical variables reasonably predict AKI onset a few days prior. This work may lead to earlier recognition of AKI and treatment to improve clinical outcomes.

Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors, Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers, and Outcomes in Patients Hospitalized for COVID-19

Background

Use of angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers (ACEi/ARB) is thought to affect COVID‐19 through modulating levels of angiotensin‐converting enzyme 2, the cell entry receptor for SARS‐CoV2. We sought to assess the association between ACEi/ARB, biomarkers of inflammation, and outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID‐19.

Methods and Results

We leveraged the ISIC (International Study of Inflammation in COVID‐19), identified patients admitted for symptomatic COVID‐19 between February 1, 2020 and June 1, 2021 for COVID‐19, and examined the association between in‐hospital ACEi/ARB use and all‐cause death, need for ventilation, and need for dialysis. We estimated the causal effect of ACEi/ARB on the composite outcomes using marginal structural models accounting for serial blood pressure and serum creatinine measures. Of 2044 patients in ISIC, 1686 patients met inclusion criteria, of whom 398 (23.6%) patients who were previously on ACEi/ARB received at least 1 dose during their hospitalization for COVID‐19. There were 215 deaths, 407 patients requiring mechanical ventilation, and 124 patients who required dialysis during their hospitalization. Prior ACEi/ARB use was associated with lower levels of soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor and C‐reactive protein. In multivariable analysis, in‐hospital ACEi/ARB use was associated with a lower risk of the composite outcome of in‐hospital death, mechanical ventilation, or dialysis (adjusted hazard ratio 0.49, 95% CI [0.36–0.65]).

Conclusions

In patients hospitalized for COVID‐19, ACEi/ARB use was associated with lower levels of inflammation and lower risk of in‐hospital outcomes. Clinical trials will define the role of ACEi/ARB in the treatment of COVID‐19.

Registration

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04818866.

COVID-19 and RAAS inhibitors: is there a final conclusion?

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the first pandemic caused by a human infecting coronavirus, has drawn global attention from the first time it appeared in Wuhan city of China in late December 2019. Detection of the responsible viral pathogen, named as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by WHO, and its possible pathogenesis lead to the forming of many hypotheses about the factors that may affect the patients' outcome. One of the SARS-CoV-2 infection concerns was the potential role of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs) in COVID-19 patients' morbidity and mortality. Studies demonstrated that because SARS-CoV-2 uses human ACE2 cell receptors as an entry receptor to invade the cells, there might be an association between antihypertensive drugs such as RAAS inhibitors (specifically ACEIs and ARBs) and the COVID-19 disease. Data are scarce and conflicting regarding ACEI or ARB consumption and how it influences disease outcomes, and a single conclusion has not been reached yet. According to the literature review in our article, the most evidentially supported theory about the use of RAAS inhibitors in COVID-19 is that these medications, including ACEI/ARB, are not associated with the increased risk of infection, disease severity, and patient prognosis. However, further studies are needed to support the hypothesis.

Characterizing non-critically ill COVID-19 survivors with and without in-hospital rehabilitation

This study investigated pre-COVID-19 admission dependency, discharge assistive equipment, discharge medical follow-up recommendation, and functional status at hospital discharge of non-critically ill COVID-19 survivors, stratified by those with (N = 155) and without (N = 162) in-hospital rehabilitation. “Mental Status”, intensive-care-unit (ICU) Mobility, and modified Barthel Index scores were assessed at hospital discharge. Relative to the non-rehabilitation patients, rehabilitation patients were older, had more comorbidities, worse pre-admission dependency, were discharged with more assistive equipment and supplemental oxygen, spent more days in the hospital, and had more hospital-acquired acute kidney injury, acute respiratory failure, and more follow-up referrals (p < 0.05 for all). Cardiology, vascular medicine, urology, and endocrinology were amongst the top referrals. Functional scores of many non-critically ill COVID-19 survivors were abnormal at discharge (p < 0.05) and were associated with pre-admission dependency (p < 0.05). Some functional scores were negatively correlated with age, hypertension, coronary artery disease, chronic kidney disease, psychiatric disease, anemia, and neurological disorders (p < 0.05). In-hospital rehabilitation providing restorative therapies and assisting discharge planning were challenging in COVID-19 circumstances. Knowledge of the functional status, discharge assistive equipment, and follow-up medical recommendations at discharge could enable appropriate and timely post-discharge care. Follow-up studies of COVID-19 survivors are warranted as many will likely have significant post-acute COVID-19 sequela.

In-hospital use of ACE inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers associates with COVID-19 outcomes in African American patients

BACKGROUNDThe angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) D allele is more prevalent among African Americans compared with other races and ethnicities and has previously been associated with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pathogenesis through excessive ACE1 activity. ACE inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers (ACE-I/ARB) may counteract this mechanism, but their association with COVID-19 outcomes has not been specifically tested in the African American population.METHODSWe identified 6218 patients who were admitted into Mount Sinai hospitals with COVID-19 between February 24 and May 31, 2020, in New York City. We evaluated whether the outpatient and in-hospital use of ACE-I/ARB is associated with COVID-19 in-hospital mortality in an African American compared with non-African American population.RESULTSOf the 6218 patients with COVID-19, 1138 (18.3%) were ACE-I/ARB users. In a multivariate logistic regression model, ACE-I/ARB use was independently associated with a reduced risk of in-hospital mortality in the entire population (OR, 0.655; 95% CI, 0.505-0.850; P = 0.001), African American population (OR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.249-0.779; P = 0.005), and non-African American population (OR, 0.748, 95% CI, 0.553-1.012, P = 0.06). In the African American population, in-hospital use of ACE-I/ARB was associated with improved mortality (OR, 0.378; 95% CI, 0.188-0.766; P = 0.006), whereas outpatient use was not (OR, 0.889; 95% CI, 0.375-2.158; P = 0.812). When analyzing each medication class separately, ARB in-hospital use was significantly associated with reduced in-hospital mortality in the African American population (OR, 0.196; 95% CI, 0.074-0.516; P = 0.001), whereas ACE-I use was not associated with impact on mortality in any population.CONCLUSIONIn-hospital use of ARB was associated with a significant reduction in in-hospital mortality among COVID-19-positive African American patients.FUNDINGNone.

Cardiovascular Disease Complicating COVID-19 in the Elderly

SARS-CoV-2, a single-stranded RNA coronavirus, causes an illness known as coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The highly transmissible virus gains entry into human cells primarily by the binding of its spike protein to the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 receptor, which is expressed not only in lung tissue but also in cardiac myocytes and the vascular endothelium. Cardiovascular complications are frequent in patients with COVID-19 and may be a result of viral-associated systemic and cardiac inflammation or may arise from a virus-induced hypercoagulable state. This prothrombotic state is marked by endothelial dysfunction and platelet activation in both macrovasculature and microvasculature. In patients with subclinical atherosclerosis, COVID-19 may incite atherosclerotic plaque disruption and coronary thrombosis. Hypertension and obesity are common comorbidities in COVID-19 patients that may significantly raise the risk of mortality. Sedentary behaviors, poor diet, and increased use of tobacco and alcohol, associated with prolonged stay-at-home restrictions, may promote thrombosis, while depressed mood due to social isolation can exacerbate poor self-care. Telehealth interventions via smartphone applications and other technologies that document nutrition and offer exercise programs and social connections can be used to mitigate some of the potential damage to heart health.

Renin-Angiotensin Aldosterone System Inhibitors in Primary Prevention and COVID-19

Background

Considering the widespread risk of collider bias and confounding by indication in previous research, the associations between renin‐angiotensin aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitor use and COVID‐19 remain unknown. Accordingly, this study tested the hypothesis that RAAS inhibitors influence the summation effect of COVID‐19 and its progression to severe outcomes.

Methods and Results

This nationwide cohort study compared all residents of Sweden, without prior cardiovascular disease, in monotherapy (as of January 1, 2020) with a RAAS inhibitor to those using a calcium channel blocker or a thiazide diuretic. Comparative cohorts were balanced using machine‐learning‐derived propensity score methods. Of 165 355 people in the analysis (51% women), 367 were hospitalized or died with COVID‐19 (246 using a RAAS inhibitor versus 121 using a calcium channel blocker or thiazide diuretic; Cox proportional hazard ratio [HR], 0.97; 95% CI, 0.74–1.27). When each outcome was assessed separately, 335 people were hospitalized with COVID‐19 (HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.70–1.22), and 64 died with COVID‐19 (HR, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.68–2.19). The severity of COVID‐19 outcomes did not differ between those using a RAAS inhibitor and those using a calcium channel blocker or thiazide diuretic (ordered logistic regression odds ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.89–1.14).

Conclusions

Despite potential limitations, this study is among the best available evidence that RAAS inhibitor use in primary prevention does not increase the risk of severe COVID‐19 outcomes; presenting strong data from which scientists and policy makers alike can base, with greater confidence, their current position on the safety of using RAAS inhibitors during the COVID‐19 pandemic.

Associastion of In-hospital Use of Statins, Aspirin, and Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone Inhibitors with Mortality and ICU Admission Due to COVID-19

The exaggerated host response to Sars-CoV-2 plays an important role in COVID-19 pathology but provides a therapeutic opportunity until definitive virus targeted therapies and vaccines become available. Given a central role of endothelial dysfunction and systemic inflammation, repurposing ACE inhibitors (ACEIs), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), statins, and aspirin has been of interest. In this retrospective, single-center study, we evaluated the primary outcomes of mortality and ICU admission in 587 hospitalized patients with documented COVID-19 with or without ACEIs, ARBs, statins, and aspirin. Atorvastatin was associated with reduced mortality, which persisted after adjusting for age, lockdown status, and other medications (OR: 0.18. 95% CI: 0.06-0.49, P = 0.001). ACEIs were also associated with reduced mortality in the crude model (OR: 0.20, CI: 0.06-0.66, P = 0.008), as ACEIs and ARBs were combined as a single group (OR: 0.35, CI: 0.16-0.75, P = 0.007), although ARBs alone did not reach statistical significance. There was no association between any medications and risk of ICU admission. Aspirin only achieved a significant association of reduced mortality in a subgroup of patients with diabetes in the crude model (OR: 0.17, CI: 0.04-0.80, P = 0.02). The reduced mortality observed with atorvastatin is consistent with other literature, and consideration should be given to atorvastatin as a COVID-19 treatment. While there was suggested benefit of ACEIs and ARBs in the present study, other studies are varied and further studies are warranted to recommend employing these medications as a treatment strategy. Nevertheless, this study combined with others continues to give credibility that ACEIs and ARBs are safe to continue in the setting of COVID-19.

Effects of Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone Inhibitors on Early Outcomes of Hypertensive COVID-19 Patients: A Randomized Triple-Blind Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

The role of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEis) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) has been addressed in some studies related to the current coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic with possible higher severity and mortality in patients with hypertension. A triple-blind randomized controlled trial was designed to evaluate the effects of these medications on the COVID-19 progression.

METHODS

Patients were enrolled in this trial between April and September 2020. They were randomized in 2 groups. The former dosage of ACEis/ARBs was continued in one group while in another group, the ACEis/ARBs were replaced by amlodipine ± carvedilol according to the dose equivalents. The primary outcomes were length of stay in hospitals and intensive care units (ICUs). Other outcomes include mechanical ventilation, noninvasive ventilation, readmission, and COVID-19 symptoms after discharge.

RESULTS

We randomized 64 patients with COVID-19 into 2 groups. Most patients were aged 66-80 and 46-65 years-old, 33 (51.6%) and 27 (42.2%), respectively. The study groups were nearly similar in baseline vital signs and characteristics. In addition, there was no significant difference in terms of recorded systolic and diastolic blood pressure measurements between groups. Furthermore, we did not find a significant difference between the days of ICU or ward admission, the discharge rate, or readmission rates between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This randomized triple-blind multicentric clinical trial did not show any deleterious effects of ACEi/ARB medications in hypertensive COVID-19 patients.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION

The trial acquired the ethical code, IR.TUMS.VCR.REC.1399.028 and was registered in the Iranian randomized controlled trial system (registration no. IRCT20151113025025N3), https://en.irct.ir/trial/46531.

Longitudinal progression of clinical variables associated with graded liver injury in COVID-19 patients

Background

Hospital-acquired liver injury is associated with worse outcomes in COVID-19. This study investigated the temporal progression of clinical variables of in-hospital liver injury in COVID-19 patients.

Methods

COVID-19 patients (n = 1361) were divided into no, mild and severe liver injury (nLI, mLI and sLI) groups. Time courses of laboratory variables were time-locked to liver-injury onset defined by alanine aminotransferase level. Predictors of liver injury were identified using logistic regression.

Results

The prevalence of mLI was 39.4% and sLI was 9.2%. Patients with escalated care had higher prevalence of sLI (23.2% vs. 5.0%, p < 0.05). sLI developed 9.4 days after hospitalization. sLI group used more invasive ventilation, anticoagulants, steroids, and dialysis (p < 0.05). sLI, but not mLI, had higher adjusted mortality odds ratio (= 1.37 [95% CI 1.10, 1.70], p = 0.005). Time courses of the clinical variables of the sLI group differed from those of the nLI and mLI group. In the sLI group, alanine aminotransferase, procalcitonin, ferritin, and lactate dehydrogenase showed similar temporal profiles, whereas white-blood-cell count, D-dimer, C-reactive protein, respiration and heart rate were elevated early on, and lymphocyte and SpO2 were lower early on. The top predictors of sLI were alanine aminotransferase, lactate dehydrogenase, respiration rate, ferritin, and lymphocyte, yielding an AUC of 0.98, 0.92, 0.88 and 0.84 at 0, − 1, − 2 and − 3 days prior to onset, respectively.

Conclusions

This study identified key clinical variables predictive of liver injury in COVID-19, which may prove useful for management of liver injury. Late onset of sLI and more aggressive care are suggestive of treatment-related hepatotoxicity.

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.

Telmisartan for treatment of Covid-19 patients: An open multicenter randomized clinical trial

Background

Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), such as telmisartan, have been postulated to treat Covid-19-induced lung inflammation.

Methods

This is a parallel-group, randomized, two-arm, open-label, adaptive, multicenter superiority trial with 1:1 allocation ratio. Participants included patients from 18 years of age hospitalized with Covid-19 with 4 or fewer days since symptom onset enrolled at a university and a community hospital in Buenos Aires, Argentina. Exclusion criteria included prior intensive care unit (ICU) admission and use of ARBs/angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors at randomization. Control arm received standard care alone and treatment arm telmisartan 80 mg twice daily for 14 days. Primary outcomes were C-reactive protein (CRP) plasma levels at day 5 and 8 after randomization. Secondary outcomes included time to discharge within 15 days, admission to ICU and death at 15- and 30-days. NCT04355936 (Completed).

Findings

A pragmatic decision to end the study before the third interim analysis was made on Oct. 30th due to sharp reduction in recruitment. A total of 162 patients were randomized. 158 patients enrolled between May 14 and October 30 2020, were included in the analysis, 80 in the standard care and 78 in the telmisartan added to standard care group. Baseline absolute CRP serum levels were 5.53 ± 6.19 mg/dL (95% CI 6.91 to 4.15, n = 80) and 9.04 ± 7.69 (95% CI 9.04 to 10.82, n = 74) in the standard care and telmisartan added to standard care groups, respectively. Day 5 control-group CRP levels were 6.06 ± 6.95 mg/dL (95% CI 7.79-4.35, n = 66) while telmisartan group were 3.83 ± 5.08 mg/dL (95% CI 5.08-2.59, n = 66, p = 0.038). Day 8 CRP levels were 6.30 ± 8.19 mg/dL (95% CI 8.79-3.81, n = 44) and 2.37 ± 3.47 mg/dL (95% CI 3.44-1.30, n = 43, p = 0.0098) in the control and telmisartan groups, respectively (all values expressed as mean ± SD). Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that telmisartan-treated patients had a lower median time-to-discharge (control=15 days; telmisartan=9 days). Death by day 30 was reduced in the telmisartan-treated group (control 22.54%, 16/71; telmisartan 4.29%, 3/70 participants; p = 0.0023). Composite ICU, mechanical ventilation or death was reduced by telmisartan treatment at days 15 and 30. No adverse events were reported.

Interpretation

Our study suggests that the ARB telmisartan, a widely used antihypertensive drug, is safe and could reduce morbidity and mortality in hospitalized patients infected with SARS -CoV-2 by anti-inflammatory effects. Further studies employing telmisartan are needed for confirmation of our results and to define its true therapeutic value as a tool against Covid-19.

Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors and Angiotensin Receptor Blockers Withdrawal Is Associated with Higher Mortality in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19

Our main aim was to describe the effect on the severity of ACEI (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor) and ARB (angiotensin II receptor blocker) during COVID-19 hospitalization. A retrospective, observational, multicenter study evaluating hospitalized patients with COVID-19 treated with ACEI/ARB. The primary endpoint was the incidence of the composite outcome of prognosis (IMV (invasive mechanical ventilation), NIMV (non-invasive mechanical ventilation), ICU admission (intensive care unit), and/or all-cause mortality). We evaluated both outcomes in patients whose treatment with ACEI/ARB was continued or withdrawn. Between February and June 2020, 11,205 patients were included, mean age 67 years (SD = 16.3) and 43.1% female; 2162 patients received ACEI/ARB treatment. ACEI/ARB treatment showed lower all-cause mortality (p < 0.0001). Hypertensive patients in the ACEI/ARB group had better results in IMV, ICU admission, and the composite outcome of prognosis (p < 0.0001 for all). No differences were found in the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events. Patients previously treated with ACEI/ARB continuing treatment during hospitalization had a lower incidence of the composite outcome of prognosis than those whose treatment was withdrawn (RR 0.67, 95%CI 0.63-0.76). ARB was associated with better survival than ACEI (HR 0.77, 95%CI 0.62-0.96). ACEI/ARB treatment during COVID-19 hospitalization was associated with protection on mortality. The benefits were greater in hypertensive, those who continued treatment, and those taking ARB.

Discontinuation of Antihypertensive Medications on the Outcome of Hospitalized Patients With Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Coronavirus 2

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

RAASi (renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors) are suggested as possible treatment option in the early phase of severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. A meta-analysis investigating the possible detrimental effects of RAASi on the severity of (SARS-CoV-2) infection showed that ambulatory use of RAASi, by hospitalized patients, has a neutral effect. It is, however, conceivable that this observation is biased by the fact that antihypertensive medications, are often discontinued at or during admission in hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2. We, therefore, investigated the effect of discontinuation of antihypertensive medications, in hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2. We performed a retrospective observational study on 1584 hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 from 10 participating hospitals in the Netherlands. Differences in the outcome (severity of disease or death) between the groups in which medications were either continued or discontinued during the course of hospitalization were assessed using logistic regression models. Discontinuation of angiotensin receptor blockers, ACE (angiotensin-converting enzyme) inhibitors and β-blockers, even when corrected for sex, age, and severity of symptoms during admission, resulted in a 2 to 4× higher risk of dying from SARS-CoV-2 infection (odds ratio [95% CI]); angiotensin receptor blockers 2.65 [1.17–6.04], ACE inhibitor (2.28 [1.15–4.54]), and β-blocker (3.60 [1.10–10.27]). In conclusion, discontinuation of at-home ACE inhibitor, angiotensin receptor blockers, or β-blocker in patients hospitalized for a SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with an increased risk of dying, whereas discontinuation of calcium channel blockers and diuretics was not.

Comparison of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors with other antihypertensives in association with coronavirus disease-19 clinical outcomes

BACKGROUND

Reports on the effects of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors on the clinical outcomes of coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) have been conflicting. We performed this meta-analysis to find conclusive evidence.

METHODS

We searched published articles through PubMed, EMBASE and medRxiv from 5 January 2020 to 3 August 2020. Studies that reported clinical outcomes of patients with COVID-19, stratified by the class of antihypertensives, were included. Random and fixed-effects models were used to estimate pooled odds ratio (OR).

RESULTS

A total 36 studies involving 30,795 patients with COVID-19 were included. The overall risk of poor patient outcomes (severe COVID-19 or death) was lower in patients taking RAAS inhibitors (OR = 0.79, 95% CI: [0.67, 0.95]) compared with those receiving non-RAAS inhibitor antihypertensives. However, further sub-meta-analysis showed that specific RAAS inhibitors did not show a reduction of poor COVID-19 outcomes when compared with any class of antihypertensive except beta-blockers (BBs). For example, compared to calcium channel blockers (CCBs), neither angiotensin-I-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) (OR = 0.91, 95% CI: [0.67, 1.23]) nor angiotensin-II receptor blockers (ARBs) (OR = 0.90, 95% CI: [0.62, 1.33]) showed a reduction of poor COVID-19 outcomes. When compared with BBs, however, both ACEIs (OR = 0.85, 95% CI: [0.73, 0.99) and ARBs (OR = 0.72, 95% CI: [0.55, 0.94]) showed an apparent decrease in poor COVID-19 outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

RAAS inhibitors did not increase the risk of mortality or severity of COVID-19. Differences in COVID-19 clinical outcomes between different class of antihypertensive drugs were likely due to the underlying comorbidities for which the antihypertensive drugs were prescribed, although adverse effects of drugs such as BBs could not be excluded.