Outcome of patients hospitalized for COVID-19 and exposure to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin-receptor blockers in France: results of the ACE-CoV study

COVID-19 and coronary artery disease; A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and aim

Patients with underlying cardiovascular disorders such as coronary artery disease (CAD) are more prone to severe forms and multiple complications of COVID-19. The present systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the impact of CAD on patients with COVID-19.

Methods

Main electronic databases, including Medline (via PubMed), EMBASE, and Web of Science, were carefully searched and reviewed for original research articles published between 2019 and 2021. One hundred nine studies that address CAD in patients with COVID-19 were selected and analyzed.

Results

Following search and screening processes, 109 relevant publications were selected for analysis. The meta-analysis of prevalence studies indicated that the frequency of CAD among patients with COVID-19 was reported in 10 countries with an overall frequency of 12.4% [(95% CI) 11.1-13.8] among 20079 COVID-19 patients. According to case reports/case series studies, 50.9% of COVID-19 patients suffered from CAD. Fever was the most common symptom in these patients (47%); 36.5% also had hypertension.

Conclusion

The results obtained during the present study show that the simultaneous presence of COVID-19 and CAD, especially in men and elderly patients, can increase the risks and complications of both diseases. Therefore, careful examination of the condition of this group of patients for timely diagnosis and treatment is strongly recommended.

Cardiovascular disease and COVID-19, a deadly combination: A review about direct and indirect impact of a pandemic

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is known to present with respiratory symptoms, which can lead to severe pneumonia and respiratory failure. However, it can have multisystem complications such as cardiovascular manifestations. The cardiovascular manifestations reported comprise myocarditis, cardiogenic shock, arrhythmias, pulmonary embolism, deep vein embolism, acute heart failure, and myocardial infarction. There is also an indirect impact of the pandemic on the management of cardiovascular care that has been shown clearly in multiple publications. In this review, we summarize the deadly relation of COVID-19 with cardiovascular events and the wider impact on several cardiovascular care areas by the pandemic situation

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.

ESC guidance for the diagnosis and management of cardiovascular disease during the COVID-19 pandemic: part 2-care pathways, treatment, and follow-up

AIMS

Since its emergence in early 2020, the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 causing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has reached pandemic levels, and there have been repeated outbreaks across the globe. The aim of this two part series is to provide practical knowledge and guidance to aid clinicians in the diagnosis and management of cardiovascular (CV) disease in association with COVID-19.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A narrative literature review of the available evidence has been performed, and the resulting information has been organized into two parts. The first, which was reported previously, focused on the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and diagnosis of CV conditions that may be manifest in patients with COVID-19. This second part addresses the topics of: care pathways and triage systems and management and treatment pathways, both of the most commonly encountered CV conditions and of COVID-19; and information that may be considered useful to help patients with CV disease (CVD) to avoid exposure to COVID-19.

CONCLUSION

This comprehensive review is not a formal guideline but rather a document that provides a summary of current knowledge and guidance to practicing clinicians managing patients with CVD and COVID-19. The recommendations are mainly the result of observations and personal experience from healthcare providers. Therefore, the information provided here may be subject to change with increasing knowledge, evidence from prospective studies, and changes in the pandemic. Likewise, the guidance provided in the document should not interfere with recommendations provided by local and national healthcare authorities.

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.

ESC guidance for the diagnosis and management of cardiovascular disease during the COVID-19 pandemic: part 2-care pathways, treatment, and follow-up

AIMS

Since its emergence in early 2020, the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 causing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has reached pandemic levels, and there have been repeated outbreaks across the globe. The aim of this two part series is to provide practical knowledge and guidance to aid clinicians in the diagnosis and management of cardiovascular (CV) disease in association with COVID-19.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A narrative literature review of the available evidence has been performed, and the resulting information has been organized into two parts. The first, which was reported previously, focused on the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and diagnosis of CV conditions that may be manifest in patients with COVID-19. This second part addresses the topics of: care pathways and triage systems and management and treatment pathways, both of the most commonly encountered CV conditions and of COVID-19; and information that may be considered useful to help patients with CV disease (CVD) to avoid exposure to COVID-19.

CONCLUSION

This comprehensive review is not a formal guideline but rather a document that provides a summary of current knowledge and guidance to practicing clinicians managing patients with CVD and COVID-19. The recommendations are mainly the result of observations and personal experience from healthcare providers. Therefore, the information provided here may be subject to change with increasing knowledge, evidence from prospective studies, and changes in the pandemic. Likewise, the guidance provided in the document should not interfere with recommendations provided by local and national healthcare authorities.

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.

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.

Chronic use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blockers and mortality in COVID-19: A multicenter prospective cohort and literature review

Aims

The role of renin‐angiotensin‐aldosterone system (RAAS) blockers on the course of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) is debated. We assessed the association between chronic use of RAAS blockers and mortality among inpatients with COVID‐19 and explored reasons for discrepancies in the literature.

Methods and results

We included adult hypertensive patients from a prospective nationwide cohort of 3512 inpatients with COVID‐19 up to June 30, 2020. Cox proportional hazard models with various adjustment or propensity weighting methods were used to estimate the hazard ratios (HR) of 30‐day mortality for chronic users versus non‐users of RAAS blockers. We analyzed data of 1160 hypertensive patients: 719 (62%) were male and 777 (67%) were older than 65 years. The main comorbidities were diabetes (n = 416, 36%), chronic cardiac disease (n = 401, 35%), and obesity (n = 340, 29%); 705 (61%) received oxygen therapy. We recorded 135 (11.6%) deaths within 30 days of diagnosis. We found no association between chronic use of RAAS blockers and mortality (unadjusted HR = 1.13, 95% CI [0.8–1.6]; propensity inverse probability treatment weighted HR = 1.09 [0.86‐1.39]; propensity standardized mortality ratio weighted HR = 1.08 [0.79–1.47]). Our comprehensive review of previous studies highlighted that significant associations were mostly found in unrestricted populations with inappropriate adjustment, or with biased in‐hospital exposure measurement.

Conclusion

Our results do not support previous concerns regarding these drugs, nor a potential protective effect as reported in previous poorly designed studies and meta‐analyses. RAAS blockers should not be discontinued during the pandemic, while in‐hospital management of these drugs will be clarified by randomized trials. NCT04262921.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Impact of previous exposure to systemic corticosteroids on unfavorable outcome in patients hospitalized for COVID-19

BACKGROUND

The impact of prior exposure to systemic corticosteroids on COVID-19 severity in patients hospitalized for a SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia is not known. The present study was designed to answer to this question.

METHODS

The population study was the Covid-Clinic-Toul cohort which records data about all hospitalized patients with a positive reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction for a SARS-CoV-2 infection at Toulouse University hospital, France. Exposure to systemic corticosteroids was assessed at hospital admission. A propensity score (PS) according to corticosteroid exposure was calculated including comorbidities, clinical, radiological and biological variables that impact COVID-19 severity. The primary outcome was composite, including admission to intensive care unit, need of mechanical ventilation and death occurring during the 14 days after hospital admission. Logistic regression models adjusted for the PS (overlap weighting) provided odds ratios (ORs) and their 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs).

RESULTS

Overall, 253 patients were included in the study. Median age was 64 years, 140 patients (59.6%) were men and 218 (86.2%) had at least one comorbidity. Seventeen patients (6.7%) were exposed to corticosteroids before hospital admission. Chronic inflammatory disease (n = 8) was the most frequent indication. One hundred and twenty patients (47.4%) met the composite outcome. In the crude model, the OR of previous exposure to systemic corticosteroids was 1.64; 95% CI: 0.60-4.44. In the adjusted model, it was 1.09 (95% CI: 0.65-1.83).

CONCLUSION

Overall, this study provide some evidences for an absence of an increased risk of unfavorable outcome with previous exposure to corticosteroids in the general setting of patients hospitalized for COVID-19.