Dataset Information

Prognostic Value of Coronary Artery Calcium Score in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients.

ABSTRACT: Background: The association of known cardiovascular risk factors with poor prognosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been recently emphasized. Coronary artery calcium (CAC) score is considered a risk modifier in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease. We hypothesized that the absence of CAC might have an additional predictive value for an improved cardiovascular outcome of hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Materials and methods: We prospectively included 310 consecutive hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Thirty patients with history of coronary artery disease were excluded. Chest computed tomography (CT) was performed in all patients. Demographics, medical history, clinical characteristics, laboratory findings, imaging data, in-hospital treatment, and outcomes were retrospectively analyzed. A composite endpoint of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) was defined. Results: Two hundred eighty patients (63.2 ± 16.7 years old, 57.5% male) were included in the analysis. 46.7% patients had a CAC score of 0. MACE rate was 21.8% (61 patients). The absence of CAC was inversely associated with MACE (OR 0.209, 95% CI 0.052-0.833, p = 0.027), with a negative predictive value of 84.5%. Conclusion: The absence of CAC had a high negative predictive value for MACE in patients hospitalized with COVID-19, even in the presence of cardiac risk factors. A semi-qualitative assessment of CAC is a simple, reproducible, and non-invasive measure that may be useful to identify COVID-19 patients at a low risk for developing cardiovascular complications.

SUBMITTER: Luchian ML

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8301217 | biostudies-literature | 2021

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Prognostic Value of Coronary Artery Calcium Score in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients.

Luchian Maria-Luiza ML Lochy Stijn S Motoc Andreea A Belsack Dries D Magne Julien J Roosens Bram B de Mey Johan J Tanaka Kaoru K Scheirlynck Esther E Boeckstaens Sven S Van den Bussche Karen K De Potter Tom T von Kemp Berlinde B Galloo Xavier X François Clara C Weytjens Caroline C Droogmans Steven S Cosyns Bernard B

Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine 20210709

<b>Background:</b> The association of known cardiovascular risk factors with poor prognosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been recently emphasized. Coronary artery calcium (CAC) score is considered a risk modifier in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease. We hypothesized that the absence of CAC might have an additional predictive value for an improved cardiovascular outcome of hospitalized COVID-19 patients. <b>Materials and methods:</b> We prospectively included 310 cons ...[more]

PMID: 34307498

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCoronary artery calcium score (CACS) is an anatomic measure of calcified atherosclerosis. Myocardial perfusion defects and reduced myocardial blood flow reserve (MBFR) are physiological measures of ischemia and coronary circulatory health. We aimed to assess the relative prognostic importance of MBFR, perfusion defects, and CACS in patients with suspected coronary artery disease.MethodsA total of 5983 consecutive patients without known history of coronary artery disease or cardiomyopathy, who underwent a CACS and 82Rb positron emission tomography myocardial perfusion imaging between 2010 and 2016, were followed for all-cause death (n=785) over median of 3 years. Prognostic value was assessed using multivariable Cox regression models, and incremental risk discrimination for imaging variables was evaluated by comparing model c-indices after adjusting for clinical risk factors (RF).ResultsMean age was 67.1 years, 60% were female, and 83% were symptomatic. CACS was 0 in 22%, abnormal perfusion in 19%, and MBFR <2 in 53.3%. When added to RF, the model with MBFR had the best fit (c=0.78, P<0.0001). Addition of CACS to model with RF and perfusion (c=0.77) offered modest improvement in discrimination over the model with RF and perfusion (c=0.76, P=0.02). Adding CACS to a model with RF, perfusion, and MBFR did not provide incremental prognostic value (c=0.785 for both, P=0.16). CACS and MBFR both had independent prognostic value in patients with normal and abnormal myocardial perfusion imaging. Even among patients with CACS of 0, MBFR <2 was present in 37.8%, being associated with higher risk of death (hazard ratio per 0.1↓, 1.10 [1.04-1.15]; P<0.001), but perfusion defects were not.ConclusionsUse of anatomic testing such as CACS of 0 to avoid myocardial perfusion imaging in symptomatic patients could lead to missing microvascular dysfunction in 4 out of 10 patients, a finding associated with a high mortality risk. Higher CACS was independently associated with the risk of death but did not provide incremental prognostic value over positron emission tomography with MBFR.

Project description:ObjectiveThe aim of this work was to evaluate the predictive value of FAR combined with CACS for MACCEs.BackgroundThe fibrinogen-albumin-ratio (FAR), a novel biomarker of inflammation, is associated with the severity of coronary artery disease (CAD). Coronary calcification score (CACS) is associated with the severity of coronary stenosis and is closely related to the prognosis of CAD patients. What is the prognostic value of FAR in patients with chest pain, which has not been reported. This study aims to evaluate the relationship between CACS and FAR and their impact on prognosis in patients with suspected CAD.MethodsWe used information from 12,904 individuals who had coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA) for chest pain and tracked down any significant adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs). The following formula was used to calculate FAR: fibrinogen (g/L)/albumin (g/L). Patients were separated into groups with greater levels of FAR (FAR-H) and lower levels of FAR (FAR-L) in accordance with the ideal cut-off value of FAR for MACCEs prediction. In addition, patients were divided into three groups based on their CACS scores (CACS ≤ 100, 100 < CACS ≤ 400, and CACS > 400).Results4946 patients [62(55-71) years, 64.4% male] were ultimately enrolled in the present study. During follow-up, a total of 234 cases (4.7%) of MACCEs were documented. Linear regression analysis results showed that CACS (R2 = 0.004, Standard β = 0.066, P < 0.001) was positively associated with FAR in patients with chest pain.Compared to ones with FAR-L, FAR-H had an increased risk for MACCEs (adjusted HR 1.371(1.053-1.786) P = 0.019). Multivariate Cox regression showed that age (adjusted HR 1.015 95% CI 1.001-1.028;p = 0.03), FAR (adjusted HR 1.355 95% CI 1.042-1.763;p = 0.023),FBG (adjusted HR 1.043 95% CI 1.006-1.083;p = 0.024) and CACS (adjusted HR 1.470 95% CI 1.250-1.727;p < 0.001) were the independent risk factors for MACCEs. The FAR and CACS significantly improved MACCEs risk stratification, contributing to substantial net reclassification improvement ( NRI 0.122, 95% CI 0.054-0.198, P < 0.001) and integrated discrimination improvement(IDI 0.011, 95% CI 0.006-0.017, P < 0.001).ConclusionFAR was an independent risk factor for MACCEs. The results showed that CACS was positively associated with FAR in patients with suspected CAD. A higher level of FAR and heavier coronary calcification burden was associated with worse outcomes among patients with suspected CAD. FAR and CACS improved the risk identification of patients with suspected CAD, leading to a significant reclassification of MACCEs.

Project description:BackgroundBedside lung ultrasound (LUS) has emerged as a useful and non-invasive tool to detect lung involvement and monitor changes in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the clinical significance of the LUS score in patients with COVID-19 remains unknown. We aimed to investigate the prognostic value of the LUS score in patients with COVID-19.MethodThe LUS protocol consisted of 12 scanning zones and was performed in 280 consecutive patients with COVID-19. The LUS score based on B-lines, lung consolidation and pleural line abnormalities was evaluated.ResultsThe median time from admission to LUS examinations was 7 days (interquartile range [IQR] 3-10). Patients in the highest LUS score group were more likely to have a lower lymphocyte percentage (LYM%); higher levels of D-dimer, C-reactive protein, hypersensitive troponin I and creatine kinase muscle-brain; more invasive mechanical ventilation therapy; higher incidence of ARDS; and higher mortality than patients in the lowest LUS score group. After a median follow-up of 14 days [IQR, 10-20 days], 37 patients developed ARDS, and 13 died. Patients with adverse outcomes presented a higher rate of bilateral involvement; more involved zones and B-lines, pleural line abnormalities and consolidation; and a higher LUS score than event-free survivors. The Cox models adding the LUS score as a continuous variable (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.05, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 1.02 ~ 1.08; P < 0.001; Akaike information criterion [AIC] = 272; C-index = 0.903) or as a categorical variable (HR 10.76, 95% CI 2.75 ~ 42.05; P = 0.001; AIC = 272; C-index = 0.902) were found to predict poor outcomes more accurately than the basic model (AIC = 286; C-index = 0.866). An LUS score cut-off > 12 predicted adverse outcomes with a specificity and sensitivity of 90.5% and 91.9%, respectively.ConclusionsThe LUS score devised by our group performs well at predicting adverse outcomes in patients with COVID-19 and is important for risk stratification in COVID-19 patients.

Dataset Information

Prognostic Value of Coronary Artery Calcium Score in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients.

Publications

Prognostic Value of Coronary Artery Calcium Score in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets