Anticoagulation and Antiplatelet Therapy for Prevention of Venous and Arterial Thrombotic Events in Critically Ill Patients With COVID-19: COVID-PACT

The COVID-19 thrombus: distinguishing pathological, mechanistic, and phenotypic features and management

A heightened risk for thrombosis is a hallmark of COVID-19. Expansive clinical experience and medical literature have characterized small (micro) and large (macro) vessel involvement of the venous and arterial circulatory systems. Most events occur in patients with serious or critical illness in the hyperacute (first 1-2 weeks) or acute phases (2-4 weeks) of SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, thrombosis involving the venous, arterial, and microcirculatory systems has been reported in the subacute (4-8 weeks), convalescent (> 8-12 weeks) and chronic phases (> 12 weeks) among patients with mild-to-moderate illness. The purpose of the current focused review is to highlight the distinguishing clinical features, pathological components, and potential mechanisms of venous, arterial, and microvascular thrombosis in patients with COVID-19. The overarching objective is to better understand the proclivity for thrombosis, laying a solid foundation for screening and surveillance modalities, preventive strategies, and optimal patient management.

von Willebrand factor antigen, von Willebrand factor propeptide and ADAMTS13 activity in TIA or ischaemic stroke patients changing antiplatelet therapy

Data are limited on the impact of commencing antiplatelet therapy on von Willebrand Factor Antigen (VWF:Ag) or von Willebrand Factor propeptide (VWFpp) levels and ADAMTS13 activity, and their relationship with platelet reactivity following TIA/ischaemic stroke. In this pilot, observational study, VWF:Ag and VWFpp levels and ADAMTS13 activity were quantified in 48 patients ≤4 weeks of TIA/ischaemic stroke (baseline), and 14 days (14d) and 90 days (90d) after commencing aspirin, clopidogrel or aspirin+dipyridamole. Platelet reactivity was assessed at moderately-high shear stress (PFA-100® Collagen-Epinephrine / Collagen-ADP / INNOVANCE PFA P2Y assays), and low shear stress (VerifyNow® Aspirin / P2Y12, and Multiplate® Aspirin / ADP assays). VWF:Ag levels decreased and VWFpp/VWF:Ag ratio increased between baseline and 14d and 90d in the overall population (P ≤ 0.03). In the clopidogrel subgroup, VWF:Ag levels decreased and VWFpp/VWF:Ag ratio increased between baseline and 14d and 90d (P ≤ 0.01), with an increase in ADAMTS13 activity between baseline vs. 90d (P ≤ 0.03). In the aspirin+dipyridamole subgroup, there was an inverse relationship between VWF:Ag and VWFpp levels with both PFA-100 C-ADP and INNOVANCE PFA P2Y closure times (CTs) at baseline (P ≤ 0.02), with PFA-100 C-ADP, INNOVANCE PFA P2Y and C-EPI CTs at 14d (P ≤ 0.05), and between VWF:Ag levels and PFA-100 INNOVANCE PFA P2Y CTs at 90d (P = 0.03). There was a positive relationship between ADAMTS13 activity and PFA-100 C-ADP CTs at baseline (R2 = 0.254; P = 0.04). Commencing/altering antiplatelet therapy, mainly attributed to commencing clopidogrel in this study, was associated with decreasing endothelial activation following TIA/ischaemic stroke. These data enhance our understanding of the impact of VWF:Ag and VWFpp especially on ex-vivo platelet reactivity status at high shear stress after TIA/ischaemic stroke.

Predictors of bleeding and thrombotic events among patients admitted to the hospital with COVID-19 and elevated D-dimer: insights from the ACTION randomized clinical trial

Therapeutic anticoagulation showed inconsistent results in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and selection of the best patients to use this strategy still a challenge balancing the risk of thrombotic and hemorrhagic outcomes. The present post-hoc analysis of the ACTION trial evaluated the variables independently associated with both bleeding events (major bleeding or clinically relevant non-major bleeding) and the composite outcomes thrombotic events (venous thromboembolism, myocardial infarction, stroke, systemic embolism, or major adverse limb events). Variables were assessed one by one with independent logistic regressions and final models were chosen based on Akaike information criteria. The model for bleeding events showed an area under the curve of 0.63 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.53 to 0.73), while the model for thrombotic events had an area under the curve of 0.72 (95% CI 0.65 to 0.79). Non-invasive respiratory support was associated with thrombotic but not bleeding events, while invasive ventilation was associated with both outcomes (Odds Ratio of 7.03 [95 CI% 1.95 to 25.18] for thrombotic and 3.14 [95% CI 1.11 to 8.84] for bleeding events). Beyond respiratory support, creatinine level (Odds Ratio [OR] 1.01 95% CI 1.00 to 1.02 for every 1.0 mg/dL) and history of coronary disease (OR 3.67; 95% CI 1.32 to 10.29) were also independently associated to the risk of thrombotic events. Non-invasive respiratory support, history of coronary disease, and creatinine level may help to identify hospitalized COVID-19 patients at higher risk of thrombotic complications.ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04394377.

Application of the Win Ratio Method in the ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 Trial Comparing Edoxaban With Warfarin in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular trials often use a composite end point and a time-to-first event model. We sought to compare edoxaban versus warfarin using the win ratio, which offers data complementary to time-to-first event analysis, emphasizing the most severe clinical events.

METHODS

ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 (Effective Anticoagulation With Factor Xa Next Generation in Atrial Fibrillation-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 48) was a double-blind, randomized trial in which patients with atrial fibrillation were assigned 1:1:1 to a higher dose edoxaban regimen (60/30 mg daily), a lower dose edoxaban regimen (30/15 mg daily), or warfarin. In an exploratory analysis, we analyzed the trial outcomes using an unmatched win ratio approach. The win ratio for each edoxaban regimen was the total number of edoxaban wins divided by the number of warfarin wins for the following ranked clinical outcomes: 1: death; 2: hemorrhagic stroke; 3: ischemic stroke/systemic embolic event/epidural or subdural bleeding; 4: noncerebral International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis major bleeding; and 5: cardiovascular hospitalization.

RESULTS

21 105 patients were randomized to higher dose edoxaban regimen (N=7035), lower dose edoxaban regimen (N=7034), or warfarin (N=7046), yielding >49 million pairs for each treatment comparison. The median age was 72 years, 38% were women, and 59% had prior vitamin K antagonist use. The win ratio was 1.11 (95% CI, 1.05-1.18) for higher dose edoxaban regimen versus warfarin and 1.11 (95% CI, 1.05-1.18) for lower dose edoxaban regimen versus warfarin. The favorable impacts of edoxaban on death (34% of wins) and cardiovascular hospitalization (41% of wins) were the major contributors to the win ratio. Results consistently favored edoxaban in subgroups based on creatine clearance and dose reduction at baseline, with heightened benefit among those without prior vitamin K antagonist use.

CONCLUSIONS

In a win ratio analysis of the ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 trial, both dose regimens of edoxaban were superior to warfarin for the net clinical outcome incorporating ischemic and bleeding events. As the win ratio emphasizes the most severe clinical events, this analysis supports the superiority of edoxaban over warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT00781391.

Anticoagulation in COVID-19 patients - An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Thromboembolic events are common complications of COVID-19. Clinical study results on safety and efficacy of anticoagulation in COVID-19 are controversial.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This report is the second update of our systematic review with meta-analysis on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing standard thromboprophylaxis, intermediate or therapeutic dose anticoagulation or no anticoagulation in COVID-19 in- and outpatients. We searched eligible studies up to 5 October 2023. Certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE.

RESULTS

For this update we included fourteen new RCTs and a total of 27 RCTs with 16,789 patients. Certainty of evidence ranged from very low to high depending on outcome and comparison. Standard thromboprophylaxis with low dose anticoagulation may have little or no effect for COVID-19 outpatients compared to no anticoagulation. In inpatients with moderate or severe COVID-19, intermediate dose anticoagulation may decrease any thrombotic events or death, but may increase major bleeding compared to standard thromboprophylaxis. Therapeutic dose anticoagulation decreases thrombotic events or deaths in inpatients with moderate COVID-19, but probably has little or no effect in patients with severe COVID-19 compared to standard thromboprophylaxis with low or intermediate dose anticoagulation. With therapeutic dose anticoagulation, the risk of major bleeding probably increases regardless of COVID-19 severity. We are uncertain on the effect of thromboprophylaxis with low dose anticoagulation compared to no anticoagulation in the post-discharge setting.

CONCLUSIONS

Hospitalized, moderately-ill COVID-19 patients may benefit from intermediate or therapeutic dose anticoagulation, while critically ill patients may not. Risk of major bleeding must be considered.

Appropriate thromboprophylaxis strategy for COVID-19 patients on dosage, antiplatelet therapy, outpatient, and postdischarge prophylaxis: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

There was controversy surrounding the optimal thromboprophylaxis strategy for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. This included debates on the dosage of anticoagulants for thromboembolism prophylaxis, the requirement for additional antiplatelet therapy, and the necessity of prophylaxis for outpatients and postdischarge. To explore this, the authors performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science were last searched on 26 July 2023 for studies comparing the effect of different dose of anticoagulation, additional antiplatelet, and postdischarge prophylaxis for COVID-19 patients. The results of eligible studies were analyzed in terms of thromboembolism events, major bleeding and all-cause mortality during follow-up.

RESULTS

Our study included a total of 25 randomized controlled trials, involving 17 911 patients. Our results revealed that, compared to prophylactic dose, therapeutic dose showed lower thrombotic risk (RR, 0.66; 95% CI: 0.45-0.96) but had similar major bleeding risk for critically ill patients with COVID-19. On the other hand, intermediate dose and prophylactic dose demonstrated similar thromboembolism risk and major bleeding risk. For noncritically ill patients with COVID-19, therapeutic dose of anticoagulants was associated with lower thrombotic risk (RR, 0.50; 95% CI: 0.34-0.72) but, at the same time, increased the risk of major bleeding (RR, 2.01; 95% CI: 1.22-3.33). However, intermediate dose showed lower thromboembolism risk (RR, 0.38; 95% CI: 0.21-0.69) while maintaining a similar major bleeding risk. In critically ill patients, additional antiplatelet therapy showed similar thromboembolism, major bleeding risk, and mortality when compared to no treatment. For outpatients, additional prophylactic anticoagulation showed similar thromboembolism, major bleeding risk, and mortality when compared to no treatment. For postdischarge patients, postdischarge prophylaxis reduced thromboembolism risk (RR, 0.49; 95% CI: 0.31-0.76) but increased major bleeding risk (RR, 2.63; 95% CI: 1.13-6.14).

CONCLUSION

For noncritically ill patients, therapeutic dose prophylactic anticoagulation significantly reduced venous thromboembolism but increases major bleeding risk. Intermediate dose effectively lowered venous thromboembolism without raising major bleeding risk. The optimal dose and need for additional antiplatelet therapy in critically ill patients, as well as the necessity of prophylactic anticoagulation in outpatient and postdischarge patients, required further investigation and confirmation through rigorous evidence studies.

2023 ISTH update of the 2022 ISTH guidelines for antithrombotic treatment in COVID-19

Based on emerging evidence from the COVID-19 pandemic, the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH) guidelines for antithrombotic treatment in COVID-19 were published in 2022. Since then, at least 16 new randomized controlled trials have contributed additional evidence, which necessitated a modification of most of the previous recommendations. We used again the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association methodology for assessment of level of evidence (LOE) and class of recommendation (COR). Five recommendations had the LOE upgraded to A and 2 new recommendations on antithrombotic treatment for patients with COVID-19 were added. Furthermore, a section was added to answer questions about COVID-19 vaccination and vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT), for which studies have provided some evidence. We only included recommendations with LOE A or B. Panelists agreed on 19 recommendations, 4 for nonhospitalized, 5 for noncritically ill hospitalized, 3 for critically ill hospitalized, and 2 for postdischarge patients, as well as 5 for vaccination and VITT. A strong recommendation (COR 1) was given for (a) use of prophylactic dose of low-molecular-weight heparin or unfractionated heparin in noncritically ill patients hospitalized for COVID-19, (b) for select patients in this group, use of therapeutic-dose low-molecular-weight heparin/unfractionated heparin in preference to prophylactic dose, and (c) for use of antiplatelet factor 4 enzyme immunoassays for diagnosing VITT. A strong recommendation was given against (COR 3) the addition of an antiplatelet agent in hospitalized, noncritically ill patients. These international guidelines provide recommendations for countries with diverse healthcare resources and COVID-19 vaccine availability.

Prevalence, Predictors, and Outcomes of Type 2 NSTEMI in Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Data on the incidence of type 2 non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (T2MI) in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 has been limited to single-center studies. Given that certain characteristics, such as obesity and type 2 diabetes, have been associated with higher mortality in COVID-19 infections, we aimed to define the incidence of T2MI in a national cohort and identify pre-hospital patient characteristics associated with T2MI in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Using the national American Heart Association COVID-19 Cardiovascular Disease Quality Improvement Registry, we performed a retrospective 4:1 matched (age, sex, race, and body mass index) analysis of controls versus cases with T2MI. We performed (1) conditional multivariable logistic regression to identify predictive pre-hospital patient characteristics of T2MI for patients hospitalized with COVID-19 and (2) stratified proportional hazards regression to investigate the association of T2MI with morbidity and mortality. From January 2020 through May 2021, there were 709 (2.2%) out of 32 015 patients with T2MI. Five hundred seventy-nine cases with T2MI were matched to 2171 controls (mean age 70; 43% female). Known coronary artery disease, heart failure, chronic kidney disease, hypertension, payor source, and presenting heart rate were associated with higher odds of T2MI. Anti-hyperglycemic medication and anti-coagulation use before admission were associated with lower odds of T2MI. Those with T2MI had higher morbidity and mortality (hazard ratio, 1.40 [95% CI, 1.13-1.74]; P=0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

In hospitalized patients with COVID-19, those with a T2MI compared with those without had higher morbidity and mortality. Outpatient anti-hyperglycemic and anti-coagulation use were the only pre-admission factors associated with reduced odds of T2MI.

Advances and current research in primary thromboprophylaxis to prevent hospital-associated venous thromboembolism

Hospital-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE) is defined as any case of VTE occurring during hospital admission and for up to 90 days post discharge. It accounts for over 50% of all cases of VTE internationally; indeed, there are an estimated 10 million cases of hospital-associated VTE annually. Over the last decade, there has been increasing interest in improving VTE risk assessment and thromboprophylaxis. This review summarises all the recent and ongoing major research studies and future challenges in the different areas, including medical, surgical and obstetric patients, as well as special areas such as lower limb immobilisation. We include sections on both pharmacological and mechanical thromboprophylaxis.

Vascular Alterations Following COVID-19 Infection: A Comprehensive Literature Review

SARS-CoV-2, the causative agent of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, has revealed a broader impact beyond the respiratory system, predominantly affecting the vascular system with various adverse manifestations. The infection induces endothelial dysfunction and immune system dysregulation, creating an inflammatory and hypercoagulable state. It affects both microvasculature and macrovasculature, leading to thromboembolic events, cardiovascular manifestations, impaired arterial stiffness, cerebrovascular complications, and nephropathy, as well as retinopathy-frequently observed in cases of severe illness. Evidence suggests that SARS-CoV-2 infection may result in persistent effects on the vascular system, identified as long-term COVID-19. This is characterized by prolonged inflammation, endotheliopathy, and an increased risk of vascular complications. Various imaging modalities, histopathological studies, and diagnostic tools such as video capillaroscopy and magnetic resonance imaging have been employed to visualize vascular alterations. This review aims to comprehensively summarize the evidence concerning short and long-term vascular alterations following COVID-19 infection, investigating their impact on patients' prognosis, and providing an overview of preventive strategies to mitigate associated vascular complications.

Effect of anticoagulation on the incidence of venous thromboembolism, major bleeding, and mortality among hospitalized COVID-19 patients: an updated meta-analysis

Objective

Anticoagulation is crucial for patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) due to the high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). However, the optimal anticoagulation regimen needs further exploration. Therefore, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of diverse anticoagulation dosage dosages for COVID-19.

Methods

An updated meta-analysis was performed to assess the effect of thromboprophylaxis (standard, intermediate, and therapeutic dose) on the incidence of VTE, mortality and major bleeding among COVID-19 patients. Literature was searched via PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) database. The odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated for effect estimates.

Results

Nineteen studies involving 25,289 participants without VTE history were included. The mean age of patients was 59.3 years old. About 50.96% were admitted to the intensive care unit. In the pooled analysis, both therapeutic-dose and intermediate-dose anticoagulation did not have a significant advantage in reducing VTE risk over standard dosage (OR = 1.09, 95% CI: 0.58-2.02, and OR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.70-1.12, respectively). Similarly, all-cause mortality was not further decreased in either therapeutic-dose group (OR = 1.12, 95% CI: 0.75-1.67) or intermediate-dose group (OR = 1.34, 95% CI: 0.83-2.17). While the major bleeding risk was significantly elevated in the therapeutic-dose group (OR = 2.59, 95%CI: 1.87-3.57) as compared with the standard-dose regimen. Compared with intermediate dosage, therapeutic anticoagulation did not reduce consequent VTE risk (OR = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.52-1.38) and all-cause mortality (OR = 0.84, 95% CI: 0.60-1.17), but significantly increased major bleeding rate (OR = 2.42, 95% CI: 1.58-3.70). In subgroup analysis of patients older than 65 years, therapeutic anticoagulation significantly lowered the incidence of VTE in comparation comparison with standard thromboprophylaxis, however, at the cost of elevated risk of major bleeding.

Conclusion

Our results indicated that for most hospitalized patients with COVID-19, standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation might be the optimal choice. For elderly patients at low risk of bleeding, therapeutic-dose anticoagulation could further reduce VTE risk and should be considered especially when there were other strong risk factors of VTE during hospital stay.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO, identifier, CRD42023388429.

Heparin Dose Intensity and Organ Support-Free Days in Patients Hospitalized for COVID-19

Background

Clinical trials suggest that therapeutic-dose heparin may prevent critical illness and vascular complications due to COVID-19, but knowledge gaps exist regarding the efficacy of therapeutic heparin including its comparative effect relative to intermediate-dose anticoagulation.

Objectives

The authors performed 2 complementary secondary analyses of a completed randomized clinical trial: 1) a prespecified per-protocol analysis; and 2) an exploratory dose-based analysis to compare the effect of therapeutic-dose heparin with low- and intermediate-dose heparin.

Methods

Patients who received initial anticoagulation dosed consistently with randomization were included. The primary outcome was organ support-free days (OSFDs), a combination of in-hospital death and days free of organ support through day 21.

Results

Among 2,860 participants, 1,761 (92.8%) noncritically ill and 857 (89.1%) critically ill patients were treated per-protocol. Among noncritically ill per-protocol patients, the posterior probability that therapeutic-dose heparin improved OSFDs as compared with usual care was 99.3% (median adjusted OR: 1.36; 95% credible interval [CrI]: 1.07-1.74). Therapeutic heparin had a high posterior probability of efficacy relative to both low- (94.6%; adjusted OR: 1.26; 95% CrI: 0.95-1.64) and intermediate- (99.8%; adjusted OR: 1.80; 95% CrI: 1.22-2.62) dose thromboprophylaxis. Among critically ill per-protocol patients, the posterior probability that therapeutic heparin improved outcomes was low.

Conclusions

Among noncritically ill patients hospitalized for COVID-19 who were randomized to and initially received therapeutic-dose anticoagulation, heparin, compared with usual care, was associated with improved OSFDs, a combination of in-hospital death and days free of organ support. Therapeutic heparin appeared superior to both low- and intermediate-dose thromboprophylaxis.

Mortality of hospitalized patients with COVID-19: Effects of treatment options (vitamin D, anticoagulation, isoprinosine, ivermectin) assessed by propensity score matching, retrospective analysis

INTRODUCTION

SARS-CoV-2 respiratory infection is associated with significant morbidity and mortality, especially in hospitalized high-risk patients. We aimed to evaluate the effects of treatment options (vitamin D, anticoagulation, isoprinosine, ivermectin) on hospital mortality in non-vaccinated patients during the 2021 spring wave in the Czech Republic.

METHODS

Initially, 991 patients hospitalized in the period January 1, 2021, to March 31, 2021, with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 acute respiratory infection in two university and five rural hospitals were included in the study. After exclusion of patients with an unknown outcome, a total of 790 patients entered the final analysis. The effects of different treatments were assessed in this cohort by means of propensity score matching.

RESULTS

Of the 790 patients, 282 patients died in the hospital; 37.7% were male and 33.3% were female. Age, sex, state of the disease, pneumonia, therapy, and several comorbidities were matched to simulate a case-control study. For anticoagulation treatment, 233 cases (full-dose) vs. 233 controls (prophylactic dose) were matched. The difference in mortality was significant in 16 of the 50 runs. For the treatment with isoprinosine, ivermectin, and vitamin D, none of the 50 runs led to a significant difference in hospital mortality.

CONCLUSION

Prophylactic-dose anticoagulation treatment in our study was found to be beneficial in comparison with the full dose. Supplementation with vitamin D did not show any meaningful benefit in terms of lowering the hospital mortality. Neither ivermectin nor, isoprinosine was found to significantly decrease hospital mortality.

Anti-thrombotic Effects Mediated by a Novel Dual-Target Peptide Inhibiting Both Platelet Aggregation and Thrombin Activity without Causing Bleeding

BACKGROUND

 Classical anticoagulants and antiplatelets are associated with high frequencies of bleeding complications or treatment failure when used as single agents. Thrombin plays an important role in the blood coagulation system. GP IIb/IIIa is the central receptor of platelets, which can recognize the Arg-Gly-Asp (RGD) sequence and activate platelets.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

 Molecular simulation and homology modeling were performed to design a novel dual-target anticoagulant short peptide (PTIP ). The activities of PTIP on coagulation and platelet in vitro were analyzed. The antithrombotic activity of PTIP was determined by pulmonary thromboembolism model, ferric chloride injury model and arteriovenous bypass thrombosis model. Bleeding effect and toxicity of PTIP were evaluated.

RESULTS

 We have constructed a novel dual-target peptide (PTIP) based on the direct thrombin inhibitor peptide (DTIP). PTIP was expressed at high levels in Pichia pastoris. PTIP interfered with thrombin-mediated coagulation and ADP-induced platelet aggregation in vitro. When injected intravenously or subcutaneously, PTIP showed potent and dose-dependent extension of aPTT and PT which were similar to DTIP; but only PTIP was capable of inhibiting platelet aggregation. PTIP (1.0 mg/kg) decelerated thrombosis formation in venous and arterial vessels induced by FeCl3 injury. PTIP (1.0 mg/kg) also prevented deep venous thrombosis and increased the survival rate associated with pulmonary thromboembolism. And PTIP effectively reduced thrombus length in arteriovenous bypass thrombosis model. Moreover, the antithrombotic dose of PTIP could not induce bleeding.

CONCLUSION

 These data establish that PTIP represents a novel antithrombotic agent whose effects involve both inhibition of platelet activation and reduction of fibrin generation. And PTIP not only can be used in venous thrombosis and arterial thrombosis, it can also replace the combined treatment of antiplatelet and anticoagulant drugs in thrombotic diseases.

Effect of antiplatelet therapy after COVID-19 diagnosis: A systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may predispose patients to thrombotic disease in the venous and arterial circulations.

METHODS

Based on the current debate on antiplatelet therapy in COVID-19 patients, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the effect of antiplatelet treatments. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science on February 1, 2023, and only included Randomized clinical trials. The study followed PRISMA guidelines and used Random-effects models to estimate the pooled percentage and its 95% CI.

RESULTS

Five unique eligible studies were included, covering 17,950 patients with COVID-19. The result showed no statistically significant difference in the relative risk of all-cause death in antiplatelet therapy versus non-antiplatelet therapy (RR 0.94, 95% CI, 0.83-1.05, P = 0.26, I2 = 32%). Compared to no antiplatelet therapy, patients who received antiplatelet therapy had a significantly increased relative risk of major bleeding (RR 1.81, 95%CI 1.09-3.00, P = 0.02, I2 = 16%). The sequential analysis suggests that more RCTs are needed to draw more accurate conclusions. This systematic review and meta-analysis revealed that the use of antiplatelet agents exhibited no significant benefit on all-cause death, and the upper bound of the confidence interval on all-cause death (RR 95% CI, 0.83-1.05) suggested that it was unlikely to be a substantiated harm risk associated with this treatment. However, evidence from all RCTs suggested a high risk of major bleeding in antiplatelet agent treatments.

CONCLUSION

According to the results of our sequential analysis, there is not enough evidence available to support or negate the use of antiplatelet agents in COVID-19 cases. The results of ongoing and future well-designed, large, randomized clinical trials are needed.

An early warning indicator of mortality risk in patients with COVID-19: the neutrophil extracellular traps/neutrophilic segmented granulocyte ratio

Background

Neutrophil extracellular traps (NETs) play a key role in thrombus formation in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the existing detection and observation methods for NETs are limited in their ability to provide quantitative, convenient, and accurate descriptions of in situ NETs. Therefore, establishing a quantitative description of the relationship between NETs and thrombosis remains a challenge.

Objective

We employed morphological observations of blood cells and statistical analyses to investigate the correlation between the NETs/neutrophilic segmented granulocyte ratio and mortality risk in patients with COVID-19.

Methods

Peripheral blood samples were collected from 117 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 between November 2022 and February 2023, and various blood cell parameters were measured. Two types of smudge cells were observed in the blood and counted: lymphatic and neutral smudge cells. Statistical data analysis was used to establish COVID-19 mortality risk assessment indicators.

Results

Morphological observations of neutrophilic smudge cells revealed swelling, eruption, and NETs formation in the neutrophil nuclei. Subsequently, the NETs/neutrophilic segmented granulocyte ratio (NNSR) was calculated. A high concentration of NETs poses a fatal risk for thrombus formation in patients. Statistical analysis indicated that a high NNSR was more suitable for evaluating the risk of death in patients with COVID-19 compared to elevated fibrinogen (FIB) and D-dimer (DD) levels.

Conclusion

Observing blood cell morphology is an effective method for the detection of NETs, NNSR are important markers for revealing the mortality risk of patients with COVID-19.

Multisite spontaneous hematomas and bleeding in critically ill Chinese patients with COVID-19: two case reports and a literature review

BACKGROUND

Anticoagulation is recommended as a standardized therapy for COVID-19 patients according to the WHO guidelines. However, bleeding events have also been reported. Hemorrhage or hematoma was observed in sites including the retroperitoneum, brain, alimentary tract, muscles, and soft tissues. Reduction or suspension of anticoagulants is a common intervention. Transfusion, endoscopic hemostasis, and vascular interventional therapy have been used to improve the condition.

CASE PRESENTATION

In this article, we present two cases of concurrent multisite hematomas and bleeding at other sites in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Both patients were treated with heparins and experienced bleeding after the anticoagulation therapy. Both patients were older with more than two comorbidities, and critical COVID-19. Laboratory tests revealed a considerable decrease in hemoglobin levels and alterations in the coagulation system. In the first patient, the main intervention was embolization using angiography. However, we only adjusted the anticoagulation strategy in the second case. The first patient recovered and was discharged; however, the second died of other causes. This study provides a retrospective review of typical hemorrhagic cases during anticoagulation in COVID-19 patients over the course of four years. A relatively comprehensive search was performed in Pubmed by constructing MeSH subject terms on limiting the search period and specific contents. It summarizes and synthesizes the research related to heparins and other novel anticoagulants in the context of COVID-19 from the onset of the pandemic to the present disseminated phase. This study aimed to offer valuable insights and reference points for developing anticoagulation treatment strategies for patients with COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

Anticoagulation is a crucial treatment option for patients with COVID-19. The difference in anticoagulant effects is related to the severity of COVID-19. Nafamostat can reduce thrombosis in the extracorporeal circuits in critically ill patients with COVID-19. The efficacy and safety of novel anticoagulants require further clinical data. Routine bedside assessments and real-time laboratory monitoring are essential for early identification of bleeding events during anticoagulant therapy and administering intervention.

Applying the win ratio method in clinical trials of orphan drugs: an analysis of data from the COMET trial of avalglucosidase alfa in patients with late-onset Pompe disease

BACKGROUND

Clinical trials for rare diseases often include multiple endpoints that capture the effects of treatment on different disease domains. In many rare diseases, the primary endpoint is not standardized across trials. The win ratio approach was designed to analyze multiple endpoints of interest in clinical trials and has mostly been applied in cardiovascular trials. Here, we applied the win ratio approach to data from COMET, a phase 3 trial in late-onset Pompe disease, to illustrate how this approach can be used to analyze multiple endpoints in the orphan drug context.

METHODS

All possible participant pairings from both arms of COMET were compared sequentially on changes at week 49 in upright forced vital capacity (FVC) % predicted and six-minute walk test (6MWT). Each participant's response for the two endpoints was first classified as a meaningful improvement, no meaningful change, or a meaningful decline using thresholds based on published minimal clinically important differences (FVC ± 4% predicted, 6MWT ± 39 m). Each comparison assessed whether the outcome with avalglucosidase alfa (AVA) was better than (win), worse than (loss), or equivalent to (tie) the outcome with alglucosidase alfa (ALG). If tied on FVC, 6MWT was compared. In this approach, the treatment effect is the ratio of wins to losses ("win ratio"), with ties excluded.

RESULTS

In the 2499 possible pairings (51 receiving AVA × 49 receiving ALG), the win ratio was 2.37 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.30-4.29, p = 0.005) when FVC was compared before 6MWT. When the order was reversed, the win ratio was 2.02 (95% CI, 1.13-3.62, p = 0.018).

CONCLUSION

The win ratio approach can be used in clinical trials of rare diseases to provide meaningful insight on treatment benefits from multiple endpoints and across disease domains.

Longitudinal analysis of chest Q-SPECT/CT in patients with severe COVID-19

INTRODUCTION

Patients with COVID-19 have an increased risk for microvascular lung thrombosis. In order to evaluate the type and prevalence of perfusion defects, we performed a longitudinal analysis of combined perfusion single-photon emission and low-dose computed tomography (Q-SPECT/CT scan) in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with severe COVID-19 (B.1.1.7 variant SARS-CoV-2) and respiratory insufficiency underwent chest Q-SPECT/CT during hospitalization, and 3 months after discharge. At follow-up (FU), Q-SPECT/CT were analyzed and compared with pulmonary function tests (PFT), blood analysis (CRP, D-dimers, ferritin), modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) dyspnea scale, and high-resolution CT scans (HRCT). Patients with one or more segmental perfusion defects outside the area of inflammation (PDOI) were treated with anticoagulation until FU.

RESULTS

At baseline, PDOI were found in 50 of 105 patients (47.6 %). At FU, Q-SPECT/CT scans had improved significantly (p < 0.001) and PDOI were recorded in 14 of 77 (18.2 %) patients. There was a significant correlation between mMRC score and the number of segmental perfusion defects (r = 0.511, p < 0.001), and a weaker correlation with DLCO (r = -0.333, p = 0.002) and KCO (r = -0.373, p = 0.001) at FU. Neither corticosteroid therapy nor HRCT results showed an influence on Q-SPECT/CT changes (p = 0.94, p = 0.74). CRP, D-Dimers and ferritin improved but did not show any association with the FU Q-SPECT/CT results (p = 0.08).

CONCLUSION

Segmental mismatched perfusion defects are common in severe COVID-19 and are correlated with the degree of dyspnea. Longitudinal analyses of Q-SPECT/CT scans in severe COVID-19 may help understand possible mechanisms of long COVID and prolonged dyspnea.

Antithrombotic Therapy in Arterial Thrombosis and Thromboembolism in COVID-19: An American College of Chest Physicians Expert Panel Report

BACKGROUND

Evidence increasingly shows that the risk of thrombotic complications in COVID-19 is associated with a hypercoagulable state. Several organizations have released guidelines for the management of COVID-19-related coagulopathy and prevention of VTE. However, an urgent need exists for practical guidance on the management of arterial thrombosis and thromboembolism in this setting.

RESEARCH QUESTION

What is the current available evidence informing the prevention and management of arterial thrombosis and thromboembolism in patients with COVID-19?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

A group of approved panelists developed key clinical questions by using the Population, Intervention, Comparator, and Outcome (PICO) format that address urgent clinical questions regarding prevention and management of arterial thrombosis and thromboembolism in patients with COVID-19. Using MEDLINE via PubMed, a literature search was conducted and references were screened for inclusion. Data from included studies were summarized and reviewed by the panel. Consensus for the direction and strength of recommendations was achieved using a modified Delphi survey.

RESULTS

The review and analysis of the literature based on 11 PICO questions resulted in 11 recommendations. Overall, a low quality of evidence specific to the population with COVID-19 was found. Consequently, many of the recommendations were based on indirect evidence and prior guidelines in similar populations without COVID-19.

INTERPRETATION

The existing evidence and panel consensus do not suggest a major departure from the management of arterial thrombosis according to recommendations predating the COVID-19 pandemic. Data on the optimal strategies for prevention and management of arterial thrombosis and thromboembolism in patients with COVID-19 are sparse. More high-quality evidence is needed to inform management strategies in these patients.

The 2023 Belgian clinical guidance on anticoagulation management in hospitalized and ambulatory COVID-19 patients

COVID-19 is associated with an increased risk for thrombotic complications. The trials investigating the optimal thromboprophylactic dose are performed in challenging times and seemingly produce conflicting evidence. The burdensome circumstances, divergent endpoints, and different analytical approaches hamper comparison and extrapolation of available evidence. Most importantly, clinicians should provide thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized COVID-19 patients while (re)assessing bleeding and thrombotic risk frequently. The COVID-19 Thromboprophylaxis Working Group of the BSTH updated its guidance document. It aims to summarize the available evidence critically and to guide clinicians in providing the best possible thromboprophylaxis.

Risk Factors for Postdischarge Major Thromboembolism and Mortality in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19 with Cardiovascular Comorbidities: Insights from the CORE-19 Registry

BACKGROUND

 Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with venous and arterial thromboembolism (VTE and ATE) and all-cause mortality (ACM) in hospitalized patients. High-quality data are needed on postdischarge outcomes in patients with cardiovascular disease.

OBJECTIVES

 To analyze outcomes and identify risk factors for ATE, VTE, and ACM in a high-risk subgroup of hospitalized COVID-19 patients with baseline cardiovascular disease.

METHODS

 We investigated postdischarge rates and associated risk factors of ATE, VTE, and ACM in 608 hospitalized COVID-19 patients with coronary artery disease, carotid artery stenosis (CAS), peripheral arterial disease (PAD), or ischemic stroke.

RESULTS

 Through 90 days postdischarge, outcome rates were: ATE 27.3% (10.2% myocardial infarction, 10.1% ischemic stroke, 13.2% systemic embolism, 12.7% major adverse limb event); VTE 6.9% (4.1% deep vein thrombosis, 3.6% pulmonary embolism); composite of ATE, VTE, or ACM 35.2% (214/608). Multivariate analysis showed significant association between this composite endpoint and age >75 years (odds ratio [OR]: 1.90, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.22-2.94, p = 0.004), PAD (OR: 3.23, 95% CI: 1.80-5.81, p ≤ 0.0001), CAS (OR: 1.74, 95% CI: 1.11-2.75, p = 0.017), congestive heart failure (CHF) (OR: 1.84, 95% CI: 1.02-3.35, p = 0.044), previous VTE (OR: 3.08, 95% CI: 1.75-5.42, p < 0.0001), and intensive care unit (ICU) admission (OR: 2.93, 95% CI: 1.81-4.75, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

 COVID-19 inpatients with cardiovascular disease experience high rates of ATE, VTE, or ACM through 90 days postdischarge. Age >75 years, PAD, CAS, CHF, previous VTE, and ICU admission are independent risk factors.

Uncertainties about the roles of anticoagulation and microclots in postacute sequelae of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection

Three years after the start of the pandemic, approaches to the prevention and treatment of acute COVID-19 have been established. However, postacute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC) is now the focus of current investigations searching for the etiology of the symptoms and developing diagnostic and treatment strategies, as up to 10% of those with acute COVID-19 will go on to develop PASC, a significant public health burden. Some have suggested that ongoing microvascular thrombosis and microclots may play a role in the persistent sequelae of COVID-19 infection. Treatments are being given to address the presumed role of thrombosis in PASC, and some suggest that randomized controlled trials of anticoagulants in patients with PASC should be performed. In this Forum article, we focus on findings from patients with PASC that have led to the suggestion of using anticoagulants and discuss alternative considerations.

The COVID-19 Pandemic and Coronary Heart Disease: the Next Surge

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In this narrative review, we highlight different ways in which the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted coronary heart disease (CHD) burden and how a surge in morbidity and mortality may be expected in the near future. We also discuss potential solutions, and the direction subsequent research and corrective actions should take.

RECENT FINDINGS

COVID-19 has been implicated in the development and worsening of CHD via acute and chronic mechanisms in the form of plaque rupture, destabilization, and sustenance of a chronic inflammatory state leading to long COVID syndrome and increased rates of myocardial infarction. However, indirectly the pandemic is likely to further escalate the CHD burden through poor health behaviors such as tobacco consumption, reduced physical activity, economic devastation and its associated sequelae, and regular cardiac care interruptions and delays. COVID-19 has increased the total CHD burden and will require extensive resource allocation and multifaceted strategies to curb future rise.

Antiplatelet agents for the treatment of adults with COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can cause thrombotic events that lead to severe complications or death. Antiplatelet agents, such as acetylsalicylic acid, have been shown to effectively reduce thrombotic events in other diseases: they could influence the course of COVID-19 in general.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of antiplatelets given with standard care compared to no treatment or standard care (with/without placebo) for adults with COVID-19.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register (which comprises MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP, medRxiv, CENTRAL), Web of Science, WHO COVID-19 Global literature on coronavirus disease and the Epistemonikos COVID-19 L*OVE Platform to identify completed and ongoing studies without language restrictions to December 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We followed standard Cochrane methodology. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating antiplatelet agents for the treatment of COVID-19 in adults with COVID-19, irrespective of disease severity, gender or ethnicity.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methodology. To assess bias in included studies, we used the Cochrane risk of bias tool (RoB 2) for RCTs. We rated the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach for the outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

Antiplatelets plus standard care versus standard care (with/without placebo) Adults with a confirmed diagnosis of moderate to severe COVID-19 We included four studies (17,541 participants) that recruited hospitalised people with a confirmed diagnosis of moderate to severe COVID-19. A total of 8964 participants were analysed in the antiplatelet arm (either with cyclooxygenase inhibitors or P2Y12 inhibitors) and 8577 participants in the control arm. Most people were older than 50 years and had comorbidities such as hypertension, lung disease or diabetes. The studies were conducted in high- to lower middle-income countries prior to wide-scale vaccination programmes. Antiplatelets compared to standard care: - probably result in little to no difference in 28-day mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.85 to 1.05; 3 studies, 17,249 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). In absolute terms, this means that for every 177 deaths per 1000 people not receiving antiplatelets, there were 168 deaths per 1000 people who did receive the intervention (95% CI 151 to 186 per 1000 people); - probably result in little to no difference in worsening (new need for invasive mechanical ventilation or death up to day 28) (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.01; 2 studies, 15,266 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); - probably result in little to no difference in improvement (participants discharged alive up to day 28) (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.04; 2 studies, 15,454 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); - probably result in a slight reduction of thrombotic events at longest follow-up (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.02; 4 studies, 17,518 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); - may result in a slight increase in serious adverse events at longest follow-up (Peto odds ratio (OR) 1.57, 95% CI 0.48 to 5.14; 1 study, 1815 participants; low-certainty evidence), but non-serious adverse events during study treatment were not reported; - probably increase the occurrence of major bleeding events at longest follow-up (Peto OR 1.68, 95% CI 1.29 to 2.19; 4 studies, 17,527 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Adults with a confirmed diagnosis of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection or mild COVID-19 We included two RCTs allocating participants, of whom 4209 had confirmed mild COVID-19 and were not hospitalised. A total of 2109 participants were analysed in the antiplatelet arm (treated with acetylsalicylic acid) and 2100 participants in the control arm. No study included people with asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. Antiplatelets compared to standard care: - may result in little to no difference in all-cause mortality at day 45 (Peto OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.45 to 2.22; 2 studies, 4209 participants; low-certainty evidence); - may slightly decrease the incidence of new thrombotic events up to day 45 (Peto OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.09 to 1.46; 2 studies, 4209 participants; low-certainty evidence); - may make little or no difference to the incidence of serious adverse events up to day 45 (Peto OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.64; 1 study, 3881 participants; low-certainty evidence), but non-serious adverse events were not reported. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of antiplatelets on the following outcomes (compared to standard care plus placebo): - admission to hospital or death up to day 45 (Peto OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.10; 2 studies, 4209 participants; very low-certainty evidence); - major bleeding events up to longest follow-up (no event occurred in 328 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Quality of life and adverse events during study treatment were not reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In people with confirmed or suspected COVID-19 and moderate to severe disease, we found moderate-certainty evidence that antiplatelets probably result in little to no difference in 28-day mortality, clinical worsening or improvement, but probably result in a slight reduction in thrombotic events. They probably increase the occurrence of major bleeding events. Low-certainty evidence suggests that antiplatelets may result in a slight increase in serious adverse events. In people with confirmed COVID-19 and mild symptoms, we found low-certainty evidence that antiplatelets may result in little to no difference in 45-day mortality and serious adverse events, and may slightly reduce thrombotic events. The effects on the combined outcome admission to hospital or death up to day 45 and major bleeding events are very uncertain. Quality of life was not reported. Included studies were conducted in high- to lower middle-income settings using antiplatelets prior to vaccination roll-outs. We identified a lack of evidence concerning quality of life assessments, adverse events and people with asymptomatic infection. The 14 ongoing and three completed, unpublished RCTs that we identified in trial registries address similar settings and research questions as in the current body of evidence. We expect to incorporate the findings of these studies in future versions of this review.

A Contemporary Review of Antiplatelet Therapies in Current Clinical Practice

Antiplatelet therapy plays a crucial role in a number of cardiovascular disorders. We currently have a range of antiplatelet agents in our armamentarium. In this review, we aim to summarise the common antiplatelet agents currently available, and their use in clinic practice. We not only highlight recent trials exploring antiplatelet therapy in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, but also in trials related to transcatheter aortic valve implantation and coronavirus disease 2019. Inevitably, the antithrombotic benefits of these drugs are accompanied by an increase in bleeding complications. Therefore, an individualised approach to weighing each patient's thrombotic risk versus bleeding risk is imperative, in order to improve clinical outcomes.

An Evolving Understanding of the Basis and Management of Vascular Complications of COVID-19: Where Do We Go From Here?

The COVID-19 pandemic led to millions of deaths worldwide after its emergence in 2020. The SARS-CoV-2 virus primarily affects respiratory function, but immune dysregulation leading to systemic inflammation, endothelial dysfunction, and coagulopathy can predispose to systemic complications including hematologic and vascular complications. Treatment strategies for patients with COVID-19 have rapidly evolved and the effectiveness and safety of antithrombotic agents have been evaluated in multiple clinical trials. The findings have spurred interest in the prevention and treatment of the hematologic and vascular complications of non-COVID-19 respiratory infections. This review is focused on hematological and vascular complications of COVID-19, including their pathophysiology, clinical manifestations, and management. Because of the perpetually changing nature of the disease, the review places previous data in temporal contexts and outlines potential next steps for future research in COVID-19 and other severe respiratory infections.

Clinical characteristics of COVID-19 associated vasculopathic diseases

Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) has shown to be an infectious disease affecting not only of the respiratory system, but also cardiovascular system leading to different COVID-19-associated vasculopathies. Venous and arterial thromboembolic events have been frequently described among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and inflammatory vasculopathic changes have also been observed. Several of the reported COVID-19 associated vasculopathies exhibit differences on epidemiology, clinical characteristics and outcome compared to non-COVID-19 types. This review focuses on the epidemiology, clinical, diagnostic and therapeutic characteristics as well as outcome data of COVID-19 associated thromboembolic events and inflammatory vasculopathies, elaborating similarities and differences with non-COVID-19 cohorts.

Development of a Decision Support Tool for Anticoagulation in Critically Ill Patients Admitted for SARS-CoV-2 Infection: The CALT Protocol

Severe COVID-19 infections are at high risk of causing thromboembolic events (TEEs). However, the usual exams may be unavailable or unreliable in predicting the risk of TEEs at admission or during hospitalization. We performed a retrospective analysis of two centers (n = 124 patients) including severe COVID-19 patients to determine the specific risk factors of TEEs in SARS-CoV-2 infection at admission and during stays at the intensive care unit (ICU). We used stepwise regression to create two composite scores in order to predict TEEs in the first 48 h (H0-H48) and during the first 15 days (D1-D15) in ICU. We then evaluated the performance of our scores in our cohort. During the period H0-H48, patients with a TEE diagnosis had higher D-Dimers and ferritin values at day 1 (D1) and day 3 (D3) and a greater drop in fibrinogen between D1 and D3 compared with patients without TEEs. Over the period D1-D15, patients with a diagnosis of a TEE showed a more marked drop in fibrinogen and had higher D-Dimers and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) values at D1 and D3. Based on ROC analysis, the COVID-related acute lung and deep vein thrombosis (CALT) 1 score, calculated at D1, had a diagnostic performance for TEEs at H0-H48, estimated using an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.85 (CI95%: 0.76-0.93, p < 10^-3). The CALT 2 score, calculated at D3, predicted the occurrence of TEEs over the period D1-D15 with an estimated AUC of 0.85 (CI95%: 0.77-0.93, p < 10^-3). These two scores were used as the basis for the development of the CALT protocol, a tool to assist in the decision to use anticoagulation during severe SARS-CoV-2 infections. The CALT scores showed good performances in predicting the risk of TEEs in severe COVID-19 patients at admission and during ICU stays. They could, therefore, be used as a decision support protocol on whether or not to initiate therapeutic anticoagulation.

Interaction of COVID-19 With Common Cardiovascular Disorders

The onset and widespread dissemination of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 in late 2019 impacted the world in a way not seen since the 1918 H1N1 pandemic, colloquially known as the Spanish Flu. Much like the Spanish Flu, which was observed to disproportionately impact young adults, it became clear in the early days of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic that certain groups appeared to be at higher risk for severe illness once infected. One such group that immediately came to the forefront and garnered international attention was patients with preexisting cardiovascular disease. Here, we examine the available literature describing the interaction of COVID-19 with a myriad of cardiovascular conditions and diseases, paying particular attention to patients diagnosed with arrythmias, heart failure, and coronary artery disease. We further discuss the association of acute COVID-19 with de novo cardiovascular disease, including myocardial infarction due to coronary thrombosis, myocarditis, and new onset arrhythmias. We will evaluate various biochemical theories to explain these findings, including possible mechanisms of direct myocardial injury caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 virus at the cellular level. Finally, we will discuss the strategies employed by numerous groups and governing bodies within the cardiovascular disease community to address the unprecedented challenges posed to the care of our most vulnerable patients, including heart transplant recipients, end-stage heart failure patients, and patients suffering from acute coronary syndromes, during the early days and height of the COVID-19 pandemic.

A Systematic Review of the Role of Purinergic Signalling Pathway in the Treatment of COVID-19

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has become a global health concern. Three years since its origin, despite the approval of vaccines and specific treatments against this new coronavirus, there are still high rates of infection, hospitalization, and mortality in some countries. COVID-19 is characterised by a high inflammatory state and coagulation disturbances that may be linked to purinergic signalling molecules such as adenosine triphosphate (ATP), adenosine diphosphate (ADP), adenosine (ADO), and purinergic receptors (P1 and P2). These nucleotides/nucleosides play important roles in cellular processes, such as immunomodulation, blood clot formation, and vasodilation, which are affected during SARS-CoV-2 infection. Therefore, drugs targeting this purinergic pathway, currently used for other pathologies, are being evaluated in preclinical and clinical trials for COVID-19. In this review, we focus on the potential of these drugs to control the release, degradation, and reuptake of these extracellular nucleotides and nucleosides to treat COVID-19. Drugs targeting the P1 receptors could have therapeutic efficacy due to their capacity to modulate the cytokine storm and the immune response. Those acting in P2X7, which is linked to NLRP3 inflammasome activation, are also valuable candidates as they can reduce the release of pro-inflammatory cytokines. However, according to the available preclinical and clinical data, the most promising medications to be used for COVID-19 treatment are those that modulate platelets behaviour and blood coagulation factors, mainly through the P2Y12 receptor.

Multi-marker risk assessment in patients hospitalized with COVID-19: Results from the American Heart Association COVID-19 Cardiovascular Disease Registry

BACKGROUND

The pathobiology of inflammation, thrombosis, and myocardial injury associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2) may be assessed by circulating biomarkers. However, their relative prognostic importance has been incompletely described.

METHODS

We analyzed data from patients hospitalized with COVID-19 from January 2020, to April 2021, at 122 US hospitals in the American Heart Association (AHA) COVID-19 cardiovascular (CV) disease registry. Patients with data for D-dimer, C-reactive protein (CRP), ferritin, natriuretic peptides [NP], or cardiac troponin (cTn) at admission were included. cTn quintiles were indexed to the assay-specific 99th percentile reference limits. Using multivariable logistic regression, we assessed the association between each biomarker by quintile [Q] and odds of in-hospital death and a cardiovascular and thrombotic composite outcome.

RESULTS

Of 32,636 registry patients, 26,424 (81%) had admission values for ≥1 of the key biomarkers, of which 4,527 (17%) had admission values for all 5 biomarkers. Each biomarker revealed a significant gradient for in-hospital mortality from Q1 to Q5: D-dimer 14% to 35%, CRP 11%-32%, ferritin 11% to 30%, cTn 13% to 43%, and NPs 7% to 35% (P_trend for each <.001). After adjustment for other biomarkers and clinical variables, Q5 for NPs (OR:4.67, 95% CI: 3.05-7.14) retained the greatest relative odds for death; cTn (OR:2.68, 95% CI: 2.00-3.59) and NPs (OR:7.14, 95% CI: 4.92-10.37) were associated with the greatest odds of the CV composite. Q5 for D-dimer was associated with the highest risk of thrombotic events (OR: 9.02, 95% CI: 5.36-15.18).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients hospitalized with COVID-19, cTn and NPs identified patients at high risk for an in-hospital adverse cardiovascular outcome, while elevations in D-dimer identified patients at risk for thrombotic complications.

Effects of Standard-Dose Prophylactic, High-Dose Prophylactic, and Therapeutic Anticoagulation in Patients With Hypoxemic COVID-19 Pneumonia: The ANTICOVID Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Given the high risk of thrombosis and anticoagulation-related bleeding in patients with hypoxemic COVID-19 pneumonia, identifying the lowest effective dose of anticoagulation therapy for these patients is imperative.

Objectives

To determine whether therapeutic anticoagulation (TA) or high-dose prophylactic anticoagulation (HD-PA) decreases mortality and/or disease duration compared with standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation (SD-PA), and whether TA outperforms HD-PA; and to compare the net clinical outcomes among the 3 strategies.

Design, Settings, and Participants

The ANTICOVID randomized clinical open-label trial included patients with hypoxemic COVID-19 pneumonia requiring supplemental oxygen and having no initial thrombosis on chest computer tomography with pulmonary angiogram at 23 health centers in France from April 14 to December 13, 2021. Of 339 patients randomized, 334 were included in the primary analysis-114 patients in the SD-PA group, 110 in the HD-PA, and 110 in the TA. At randomization, 90% of the patients were in the intensive care unit. Data analyses were performed from April 13, 2022, to January 3, 2023.

Interventions

Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive either SD-PA, HD-PA, or TA with low-molecular-weight or unfractionated heparin for 14 days.

Main Outcomes and Measures

A hierarchical criterion of all-cause mortality followed by time to clinical improvement at day 28. Main secondary outcome was net clinical outcome at day 28 (composite of thrombosis, major bleeding, and all-cause death).

Results

Among the study population of 334 individuals (mean [SD] age, 58.3 [13.0] years; 226 [67.7%] men and 108 [32.3%] women), use of HD-PA and SD-PA had similar probabilities of favorable outcome (47.3% [95% CI, 39.9% to 54.8%] vs 52.7% [95% CI, 45.2% to 60.1%]; P = .48), as did TA compared with SD-PA (50.9% [95% CI, 43.4% to 58.3%] vs 49.1% [95% CI, 41.7% to 56.6%]; P = .82) and TA compared with HD-PA (53.5% [95% CI 45.8% to 60.9%] vs 46.5% [95% CI, 39.1% to 54.2%]; P = .37). Net clinical outcome was met in 29.8% of patients receiving SD-PA (20.2% thrombosis, 2.6% bleeding, 14.0% death), 16.4% receiving HD-PA (5.5% thrombosis, 3.6% bleeding, 11.8% death), and 20.0% receiving TA (5.5% thrombosis, 3.6% bleeding, 12.7% death). Moreover, HD-PA and TA use significantly reduced thrombosis compared with SD-PA (absolute difference, -14.7 [95% CI -6.2 to -23.2] and -14.7 [95% CI -6.2 to -23.2], respectively). Use of HD-PA significantly reduced net clinical outcome compared with SD-PA (absolute difference, -13.5; 95% CI -2.6 to -24.3).

Conclusions and Relevance

This randomized clinical trial found that compared with SD-PA, neither HD-PA nor TA use improved the primary hierarchical outcome of all-cause mortality or time to clinical improvement in patients with hypoxemic COVID-19 pneumonia; however, HD-PA resulted in significantly better net clinical outcome by decreasing the risk of de novo thrombosis.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04808882.

COVID-19 and the Response to Antiplatelet Therapy

The coronavirus SARS-CoV2 disease (COVID-19) is connected with significant morbidity and mortality (3.4%), disorders in hemostasis, including coagulopathy, activation of platelets, vascular injury, and changes in fibrinolysis, which may be responsible for an increased risk of thromboembolism. Many studies demonstrated relatively high rates of venous and arterial thrombosis related to COVID-19. The incidence of arterial thrombosis in severe/critically ill intensive care unit-admitted COVID-19 patients appears to be around 1%. There are several ways for the activation of platelets and coagulation that may lead to the formation of thrombi, so it is challenging to make a decision about optimal antithrombotic strategy in patients with COVID-19. This article reviews the current knowledge about the role of antiplatelet therapy in patients with COVID-19.

Microvascular Thrombosis as a Critical Factor in Severe COVID-19

Platelet-endothelial interactions have a critical role in microcirculatory function, which maintains tissue homeostasis. The subtle equilibrium between platelets and the vessel wall is disturbed by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which affects all three components of Virchow's triad (endothelial injury, stasis and a hypercoagulable state). Endotheliitis, vasculitis, glycocalyx degradation, alterations in blood flow and viscosity, neutrophil extracellular trap formation and microparticle shedding are only few pathomechanisms contributing to endothelial damage and microthrombosis resulting in capillary plugging and tissue ischemia. In the following opinion paper, we discuss major pathological processes leading to microvascular endothelial activation and thrombosis formation as a possible major adverse factor driving the deterioration of patient disease course in severe COVID-19.