Does chronic oral anticoagulation reduce in-hospital mortality among COVID-19 older patients?
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Patients hospitalized with COVID-19 experienced an increased risk of venous thromboembolism.Aims
To evaluate the effect of chronic oral anticoagulation (OAC) therapy, both with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) or direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), on prognosis of COVID-19 older patients.Methods
Single-center prospective study conducted in the Emergency Department (ED) of a teaching hospital, referral center for COVID-19 in central Italy. We evaluated all the patients ≥ 65 years, consecutively admitted to our ED for confirmed COVID-19. We compared the clinical outcome of those who were on chronic OAC at ED admission with those who did not, using a propensity score matched paired cohort of controls. The primary study endpoint was all-cause in-hospital death. Patients were matched for age, sex, clinical comorbidities, and clinical severity at presentation (based on NEWS ≥ 6). Study parameters were assessed for association to all-cause in-hospital death by a multivariate Cox regression analysis to identify independent risk factor for survival.Results
Although overall mortality was slightly higher for anticoagulated patients compared to controls (63.3% vs 43.5%, p = 0.012), the multivariate adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for death was not significant (HR = 1.56 [0.78-3.12]; p = 0.208). Both DOACs (HR 1.46 [0.73-2.92]; p = 0.283) and VKAs (HR 1.14 [0.48-2.73]; p = 0.761) alone did not affect overall survival in our cohort.Conclusions
Among older patients hospitalized for COVID-19, chronic OAC therapy was not associated with a reduced risk of in-hospital death. Moreover, our data suggest similar outcome both for patients on VKAs or in patients on DOACs.
SUBMITTER: Covino M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8254066 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundMost evidence regarding anticoagulation and COVID-19 refers to the hospitalization setting, but the role of oral anticoagulation (OAC) before hospital admission has not been well explored. We compared clinical outcomes and short-term prognosis between patients with and without prior OAC therapy who were hospitalized for COVID-19.MethodsAnalysis of the whole cohort of the HOPE COVID-19 Registry which included patients discharged (deceased or alive) after hospital admission for COVID-19 in 9 countries. All-cause mortality was the primary endpoint. Study outcomes were compared after adjusting variables using propensity score matching (PSM) analyses.Results7698 patients were suitable for the present analysis (675 (8.8%) on OAC at admission: 427 (5.6%) on VKAs and 248 (3.2%) on DOACs). After PSM, 1276 patients were analyzed (638 with OAC; 638 without OAC), without significant differences regarding the risk of thromboembolic events (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.59-2.08). The risk of clinically relevant bleeding (OR 3.04, 95% CI 1.92-4.83), as well as the risk of mortality (HR 1.22, 95% CI 1.01-1.47; log-rank p value = 0.041), was significantly increased in previous OAC users. Amongst patients on prior OAC only, there were no differences in the risk of clinically relevant bleeding, thromboembolic events, or mortality when comparing previous VKA or DOAC users, after PSM.ConclusionHospitalized COVID-19 patients on prior OAC therapy had a higher risk of mortality and worse clinical outcomes compared to patients without prior OAC therapy, even after adjusting for comorbidities using a PSM. There were no differences in clinical outcomes in patients previously taking VKAs or DOACs. This trial is registered with NCT04334291/EUPAS34399.
| S-EPMC9158796 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundReal-world data on the effectiveness of boosters against COVID-19, especially as new variants continue to emerge, is limited. Our objective was to assess demographic, clinical, and outcome variables of patients requiring hospitalization for severe SARS-CoV-2 infection comparing fully vaccinated and boosted (FV&B), fully vaccinated (FV), and unvaccinated (UV) patients.MethodsThis multicenter observational cohort analysis compared demographic, clinical, and outcome variables in FV&B, FV, and UV adults hospitalized for COVID-19. Partially vaccinated (PV) and individuals still hospitalized beyond the designated follow-up date of February 1, 2022 were excluded. The primary endpoint was in-hospital mortality. Secondary endpoints included characteristics and outcomes in subpopulations of intensive care and geriatric (age >65) patients.FindingsBetween August 12th, 2021 and January 20th, 2022, 8232 patient encounters had a primary diagnosis of COVID-19 and required inpatient treatment. Of the 8232 encounters requiring hospitalization, 448 (5.8%) were FV&B, 2257 (29.2%) were FV, and 5023 (65.0%) were UV; 357 PV and 147 still hospitalized were excluded. The median age of FV&B cohort was 73 (IQR 62, 82) compared to 70 (IQR 59, 80) for FV and 59 (IQR 45, 71) for UV (0.001). Most patients were female in both the FB&V and UV groups with 51.1% and 51.8%, respectively, while the FV group had a majority of males (51.3%). The median Elixhauser weighted score was 12 (IQR 3, 22) for FV&B, 10 (IQR 2, 20) for FV, and 9 (IQR 0, 17) for UV groups (p < 0.001). In-hospital mortality was 7.1% in the FV&B, 10.3% in the FV group, and 12.8% in the UV group (p < 0.001). The FV&B group had lower in-hospital mortality than both FV and UV groups (p = 0.045 and p = 0.001, respectively). The FV group had lower in-hospital mortality than the UV group (p = 0.004).InterpretationFully vaccinated and boosted patients requiring hospital-level care for breakthrough COVID-19 have lower in-hospital mortality than fully vaccinated and unvaccinated patients despite being older and higher risk at baseline. Boosters offer added protection beyond full vaccination in preventing death. As COVID-19 continues to spread, larger expansive trials are needed to further identify risk factors for severe outcomes among the FV&B population.FundingThis research received no specific grant from any funding agency in public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
| S-EPMC8926847 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background/objectivesSeveral scoring systems have been specifically developed for risk stratification in COVID-19 patients.DesignWe compared, in a cohort of confirmed COVID-19 older patients, three specifically developed scores with a previously established early warning score. Main endpoint was all causes in-hospital death.SettingThis is a single-center, retrospective observational study, conducted in the Emergency Department (ED) of an urban teaching hospital, referral center for COVID-19.ParticipantsWe reviewed the clinical records of the confirmed COVID-19 patients aged 60 years or more consecutively admitted to our ED over a 6-week period (March 1st to April 15th, 2020). A total of 210 patients, aged between 60 and 98 years were included in the study cohort.MeasurementsInternational Severe Acute Respiratory Infection Consortium Clinical Characterization Protocol-Coronavirus Clinical Characterization Consortium (ISARIC-4C) score, COVID-GRAM Critical Illness Risk Score (COVID-GRAM), quick COVID-19 Severity Index (qCSI), National Early Warning Score (NEWS).ResultsMedian age was 74 (67-82) and 133 (63.3%) were males. Globally, 42 patients (20.0%) deceased. All the score evaluated showed a fairly good predictive value with respect to in-hospital death. The ISARIC-4C score had the highest area under ROC curve (AUROC) 0.799 (0.738-0.851), followed by the COVID-GRAM 0.785 (0.723-0.838), NEWS 0.764 (0.700-0.819), and qCSI 0.749 (0.685-0.806). However, these differences were not statistical significant.ConclusionAmong the evaluated scores, the ISARIC-4C and the COVID-GRAM, calculated at ED admission, had the best performance, although the qCSI had similar efficacy by evaluating only three items. However, the NEWS, already widely validated in clinical practice, had a similar performance and could be appropriate for older patients with COVID-19.
| S-EPMC7753731 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Introduction: Older adults are more susceptible to severe COVID-19, with increased all-cause mortality. This has been attributed to their multimorbidity and disability. However, it remains to be established which clinical features of older adults are associated with severe COVID-19 and mortality. This information would aid in an accurate prognosis and appropriate care planning. Here, we aimed to identify the chronic clinical conditions and the comorbidity clusters associated with in-hospital mortality in a cohort of older COVID-19 patients who were admitted to the IRCCS Policlinico San Martino Hospital, Genoa, Italy, between January and April 2020. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study including 219 consecutive patients aged 70 years or older and is part of the GECOVID-19 study group. During the study period, upon hospital admission, demographic information (age, sex) and underlying chronic medical conditions (multimorbidity) were recorded from the medical records at the time of COVID-19 diagnosis before any antiviral or antibiotic treatment was administered. The primary outcome measure was in-hospital mortality. Results: The vast majority of the patients (90%) were >80 years; the mean patient age was 83 ± 6.2 years, and 57.5% were men. Hypertension and cardiovascular disease, along with dementia, cerebrovascular diseases, and vascular diseases were the most prevalent clinical conditions. Multimorbidity was assessed with the Cumulative Illness Rating Scale. The risk of in-hospital mortality due to COVID-19 was higher for males, for older patients, and for patients with dementia or cerebral-vascular disease. We clustered patients into three groups based on their comorbidity pattern: the Metabolic-renal-cancer cluster, the Neurocognitive cluster and the Unspecified cluster. The Neurocognitive and Metabolic-renal-cancer clusters had a higher mortality compared with the Unspecified cluster, independent of age and sex. Conclusion: We defined patterns of comorbidity that accurately identified older adults who are at higher risk of death from COVID-19. These associations were independent of chronological age, and we suggest that the identification of comorbidity clusters that have a common pathophysiology may aid in the early assessment of COVID-19 patients with frailty to promote timely interventions that, in turn, may result in a significantly improved prognosis.
| S-EPMC8486012 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThromboembolic disease is common in coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). There is limited evidence on the association of in-hospital anticoagulation (AC) with outcomes and postmortem findings.ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to examine association of AC with in-hospital outcomes and describe thromboembolic findings on autopsies.MethodsThis retrospective analysis examined the association of AC with mortality, intubation, and major bleeding. Subanalyses were also conducted on the association of therapeutic versus prophylactic AC initiated ≤48 h from admission. Thromboembolic disease was contextualized by premortem AC among consecutive autopsies.ResultsAmong 4,389 patients, median age was 65 years with 44% women. Compared with no AC (n = 1,530; 34.9%), therapeutic AC (n = 900; 20.5%) and prophylactic AC (n = 1,959; 44.6%) were associated with lower in-hospital mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.45 to 0.62 and aHR: 0.50; 95% CI: 0.45 to 0.57, respectively), and intubation (aHR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.51 to 0.94 and aHR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.58 to 0.89, respectively). When initiated ≤48 h from admission, there was no statistically significant difference between therapeutic (n = 766) versus prophylactic AC (n = 1,860) (aHR: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.73 to 1.02; p = 0.08). Overall, 89 patients (2%) had major bleeding adjudicated by clinician review, with 27 of 900 (3.0%) on therapeutic, 33 of 1,959 (1.7%) on prophylactic, and 29 of 1,530 (1.9%) on no AC. Of 26 autopsies, 11 (42%) had thromboembolic disease not clinically suspected and 3 of 11 (27%) were on therapeutic AC.ConclusionsAC was associated with lower mortality and intubation among hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Compared with prophylactic AC, therapeutic AC was associated with lower mortality, although not statistically significant. Autopsies revealed frequent thromboembolic disease. These data may inform trials to determine optimal AC regimens.
| S-EPMC7449655 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Thrombotic complications occur at high rates in hospitalized patients with COVID-19, yet the impact of intensive antithrombotic therapy on mortality is uncertain. We examined in-hospital mortality with intermediate- compared to prophylactic-dose anticoagulation, and separately with in-hospital aspirin compared to no antiplatelet therapy, in a large, retrospective study of 2785 hospitalized adult COVID-19 patients. In this analysis, we established two separate, nested cohorts of patients (a) who received intermediate- or prophylactic-dose anticoagulation ("anticoagulation cohort", N = 1624), or (b) who were not on home antiplatelet therapy and received either in-hospital aspirin or no antiplatelet therapy ("aspirin cohort", N = 1956). To minimize bias and adjust for confounding factors, we incorporated propensity score matching and multivariable regression utilizing various markers of illness severity and other patient-specific covariates, yielding treatment groups with well-balanced covariates in each cohort. The primary outcome was cumulative incidence of in-hospital death. Among propensity score-matched patients in the anticoagulation cohort (N = 382), in a multivariable regression model, intermediate- compared to prophylactic-dose anticoagulation was associated with a significantly lower cumulative incidence of in-hospital death (hazard ratio 0.518 [0.308-0.872]). Among propensity-score matched patients in the aspirin cohort (N = 638), in a multivariable regression model, in-hospital aspirin compared to no antiplatelet therapy was associated with a significantly lower cumulative incidence of in-hospital death (hazard ratio 0.522 [0.336-0.812]). In this propensity score-matched, observational study of COVID-19, intermediate-dose anticoagulation and aspirin were each associated with a lower cumulative incidence of in-hospital death.
| S-EPMC8013588 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Thrombotic complications occur at high rates in hospitalized patients with COVID-19, yet the impact of intensive antithrombotic therapy on mortality is uncertain. How does in-hospital mortality compare with intermediate-versus prophylactic-dose anticoagulation, and separately with in-hospital aspirin versus no antiplatelet therapy, in treatment of COVID-19? Using data from 2785 hospitalized adult COVID-19 patients, we established two separate, nested cohorts of patients (1) who received intermediate- or prophylactic-dose anticoagulation ("anticoagulation cohort", N = 1624), or (2) who were not on home antiplatelet therapy and received either in-hospital aspirin or no antiplatelet therapy ("aspirin cohort", N = 1956). Propensity score matching utilizing various markers of illness severity and other patient-specific covariates yielded treatment groups with well-balanced covariates in each cohort. The primary outcome was cumulative incidence of in-hospital death. Among propensity score-matched patients in the anticoagulation cohort (N = 382), in a multivariable regression model, intermediate-compared to prophylactic-dose anticoagulation was associated with a significantly lower cumulative incidence of in-hospital death (hazard ratio 0.518 [0.308-0.872]). Among propensity-score matched patients in the aspirin cohort (N = 638), in a multivariable regression model, in-hospital aspirin compared to no antiplatelet therapy was associated with a significantly lower cumulative incidence of in-hospital death (hazard ratio 0.522 [0.336-0.812]). In this propensity score-matched, observational study of COVID-19, intermediate-dose anticoagulation and aspirin were each associated with a lower cumulative incidence of in-hospital death. No conflict of interest exists for any author on this manuscript.
| S-EPMC7814841 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) shows high morbidity and mortality, particularly in patients with concomitant cardiovascular diseases. Some of these patients are under oral anticoagulation (OAC) at admission, but to date, there are no data on the clinical profile, prognosis and risk factors of such patients during hospitalization for COVID-19.DesignSubanalysis of the international 'real-world' HOPE COVID-19 registry. All patients with prior OAC at hospital admission for COVID-19 were suitable for the study. All-cause mortality was the primary endpoint.ResultsFrom 1002 patients included, 110 (60.9% male, median age of 81.5 [IQR 75-87] years, median Short-Form Charlson Comorbidity Index [CCI] of 1 [IQR 1-3]) were on OAC at admission, mainly for atrial fibrillation and venous thromboembolism. After propensity score matching, 67.9% of these patients died during hospitalization, which translated into a significantly higher mortality risk compared to patients without prior OAC (HR 1.53, 95% CI 1.08-2.16). After multivariate Cox regression analysis, respiratory insufficiency during hospitalization (HR 6.02, 95% CI 2.18-16.62), systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) during hospitalization (HR 2.29, 95% CI 1.34-3.91) and the Short-Form CCI (HR 1.24, 95% CI 1.03-1.49) were the main risk factors for mortality in patients on prior OAC.ConclusionsCompared to patients without prior OAC, COVID-19 patients on OAC therapy at hospital admission showed lower survival and higher mortality risk. In these patients on OAC therapy, the prevalence of several comorbidities is high. Respiratory insufficiency and SIRS during hospitalization, as well as higher comorbidity, pointed out those anticoagulated patients with increased mortality risk.
| S-EPMC7645931 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDuring the first wave of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, older patients had an increased risk of hospitalisation and death. Reports on the association of frailty with poor outcome have been conflicting.ObjectiveThe aim of the present study was to investigate the independent association between frailty and in-hospital mortality in older hospitalised COVID-19 patients in the Netherlands.MethodsThis was a multicentre retrospective cohort study in 15 hospitals in the Netherlands, including all patients aged ≥70 years, who were hospitalised with clinically confirmed COVID-19 between February and May 2020. Data were collected on demographics, co-morbidity, disease severity and Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS). Primary outcome was in-hospital mortality.ResultsA total of 1,376 patients were included (median age 78 years (interquartile range 74-84), 60% male). In total, 499 (38%) patients died during hospital admission. Parameters indicating presence of frailty (CFS 6-9) were associated with more co-morbidities, shorter symptom duration upon presentation (median 4 versus 7 days), lower oxygen demand and lower levels of C-reactive protein. In multivariable analyses, the CFS was independently associated with in-hospital mortality: compared with patients with CFS 1-3, patients with CFS 4-5 had a two times higher risk (odds ratio (OR) 2.0 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.3-3.0)) and patients with CFS 6-9 had a three times higher risk of in-hospital mortality (OR 2.8 (95% CI 1.8-4.3)).ConclusionsThe in-hospital mortality of older hospitalised COVID-19 patients in the Netherlands was 38%. Frailty was independently associated with higher in-hospital mortality, even though COVID-19 patients with frailty presented earlier to the hospital with less severe symptoms.
| S-EPMC7929372 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundParticularly in frail patients, anticoagulation may be underused because of the fear of bleeding.ObjectiveTo determine whether the use of antithrombotic medication is an independent risk factor for mortality in frail elderly with repeated falls.MethodsAll patients aged 65 years or older at the Fall and Syncope Clinic were eligible. Frailty was calculated with a Frailty Index (FI) based on the accumulation of deficits model. Risks were calculated with a cox regression analysis, adjusted for age, sex, and Frailty Index.Results663 patients were included in this analysis. The median age was 80 years, 438 were women (66%), 73% had polypharmacy, and 380 patients (57%) had cognitive impairment. The mean FI was 0.23 (sd 0.09), 182 patients were moderately frail (27.5%), and 259 (39.1%) were severely frail. A total of 140 (21%) used oral anticoagulation and 223 (34%) used antiplatelet agents. A total of 196 patients (29.6%) died during follow-up. In the adjusted cox regression model, the use of neither antiplatelets nor anticoagulation was associated with mortality. A strong association was found with frailty (HR 74.0, 95% CI 13.1-417.3) and a weak association with age (HR 1.05, 95% CI 1.03-1.08). A lower risk of mortality was seen in women (HR 0.5, 95% CI 0.3-0.6).ConclusionsIn this cohort of frail older patients, there was no independent association between the use of antithrombotic medication and mortality. A strong association with mortality was found with frailty, a weak association was found with age, and a lower mortality risk was found in women. Our data indicate that the fear of bleeding or increased mortality in frail patients with an indication for oral anticoagulation may be unjustified.
| S-EPMC10706899 | biostudies-literature