Left ventricular hemodynamics with veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation

BACKGROUND

There is considerable debate about the hemodynamic effects of veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO).

AIMS

To evaluate the changes in left ventricular (LV) function, volumes, and work in patients treated with VA-ECMO using invasive LV catheterization and three-dimensional echocardiographic volumes.

METHODS

Patients on VA-ECMO underwent invasive hemodynamic evaluation due to concerns regarding candidacy for decannulation. Hemodynamic parameters were reported as means±standard deviations or medians (interquartile ranges) after evaluating for normality. Paired comparisons were done to evaluate hemodynamics at the baseline (highest) and lowest tolerated levels of VA-ECMO support.

RESULTS

Twenty patients aged 52.3 ± 15.8 years were included. All patients received VA-ECMO for refractory cardiogenic shock (5/20 SCAI stage D, 15/20 SCAI stage E). At 3.0 (2.0, 4.0) days after VA-ECMO cannulation, the baseline LV ejection fraction was 20% (15%, 27%). The baseline and lowest VA-ECMO flows were 4.0 ± 0.6 and 1.5 ± 0.6 L/min, respectively. Compared to the lowest flow, full VA-ECMO support reduced LV end-diastolic volume [109 ± 81 versus 134 ± 93 mL, p = 0.001], LV end-diastolic pressure (14 ± 9 vs. 19 ± 9 mmHg, p < 0.001), LV stroke work (1858 ± 1413 vs. 2550 ± 1486 mL*mmHg, p = 0.002), and LV pressure-volume area (PVA) (4507 ± 1910 vs. 5193 ± 2388, p = 0.03) respectively. Mean arterial pressure was stable at the highest and lowest flows (80 ± 16 vs. 75 ± 14, respectively; p = 0.08) but arterial elastance was higher at the highest VA-ECMO flow (4.9 ± 2.2 vs lowest flow 2.7 ± 1.6; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

High flow VA-ECMO support significantly reduced LV end-diastolic pressure, end-diastolic volume, stroke work, and PVA compared to minimal support. The Ea was higher and MAP was stable or minimally elevated on high flow.

COVID-19-Associated Myocarditis: An Evolving Concern in Cardiology and Beyond

Simple Summary

Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) affects many organs in the body, including the heart. One complication of particular concern is inflammation of the heart muscle, called myocarditis. This paper presents updated research data on COVID-19-associated myocarditis. Specifically, we review the incidence, potential mechanisms, blood and imaging tests that can be used to detect the disease. We emphasize that, in contrast with early reports, recent data suggest that myocarditis in the setting of COVID-19 is relatively uncommon, yet infected individuals are at a substantially increased risk for poor outcomes. It is important to continue research in this area.

Abstract

The direct and indirect adverse effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection on the cardiovascular system, including myocarditis, are of paramount importance. These not only affect the disease course but also determine clinical outcomes and recovery. In this review, the authors aimed at providing an update on the incidence of Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19)-associated myocarditis. Our knowledge and experience relevant to this area continues to evolve rapidly since the beginning of the pandemic. It is crucial for the scientific and medical community to stay abreast of current information. Contrasting early reports, recent data suggest that the overall incidence of SARS-CoV-2-associated myocarditis is relatively low, yet infected individuals are at a substantially increased risk. Therefore, understanding the pathophysiology and diagnostic evaluation, including the use of serum biomarkers and imaging modalities, remain important. This review aims to summarize the most recent data in these areas as they relate to COVID-19-associated myocarditis. Given its increasing relevance, a brief update is included on the proposed mechanisms of myocarditis in COVID-19 vaccine recipients.

Update on COVID-19 Myocarditis

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) gained worldwide attention at the end of 2019 when it was identified to cause severe respiratory distress syndrome. While it primarily affects the respiratory system, we now have evidence that it affects multiple organ systems in the human body. Cardiac manifestations may include myocarditis, life threatening arrhythmias, acute coronary syndrome, systolic heart failure, and cardiogenic shock. Myocarditis is increasingly recognized as a complication of Coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) and may result from direct viral injury or from exaggerated host immune response. The diagnosis is established similar to other etiologies, and is based on detailed history, clinical exam, laboratory findings and non-invasive imaging studies. When available, cardiac MRI is the preferred imaging modality. Endomyocardial biopsy may be performed if the diagnosis remains uncertain. Current management is mainly supportive with the potential addition of interventions recommended for severe COVID-19 disease, such as remdesivir, steroids, and convalescent plasma. In the setting of cardiogenic shock and refractory, life-threatening arrhythmias that persist despite medical therapy, advanced mechanical circulatory support devices should be considered. Ultimately, early recognition and aggressive intervention are key factors in reducing morbidity and mortality. Our management strategy is expected to evolve further as we learn more about COVID-19 disease and the associated cardiac complications.

Knowledge, attitudes and practices of anabolic steroid usage among gym users in Trinidad

Self-administered questionnaires were completed by 1062 gym-users in 14 gyms in Trinidad from February 1997 to July 1997 to determine the knowledge, attitudes and practices regarding anabolic steroids (AS). Five hundred and sixty (52.7%) females and 502 (48.3%) males completed the questionnaire. Half of the total sample were individuals in the 20 to 29 year age group. From the 17 questions that tested knowledge about AS, the median number of correct responses was 7 with a mode of 8. Increased muscle mass was correctly identified as one of the effects of AS by 841 respondents (79.2%), while 249 (23.6%) of the total sample thought asthma was treated with AS. Most (872 or 82.1%) felt that their knowledge about AS was inadequate and 700 (66.0%) were of the opinion that AS should be banned from use in competitive sports. Similarly, 733 (70.0%) of the gym-users thought AS should only be available by prescription. Thirty respondents reported having used AS (2.9%, 95% CI 2.0-4.1). The prevalence of AS use was higher among males than females (p < 0.001). Improvement of physical appearance and not competitive advantage in sport was the main reason cited for AS use. Anabolic steroid users knew more about the adverse effects of AS than non-AS users but the therapeutic uses of AS were comparatively less well known. This study demonstrated a general lack of knowledge concerning AS use and that a small but significant proportion of persons using gyms admitted to abusing AS.