Dataset Information

Association of Reduced Hospitalizations and Mortality Rates Among COVID-19-Vaccinated Patients With Heart Failure.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Patients with heart failure (HF) are at high risk for adverse outcomes when they have COVID-19. Reports of COVID-19 vaccine-related cardiac complications may contribute to vaccine hesitancy in patients with HF.

Methods

To analyze the impact of COVID-19 vaccine status on clinical outcomes in patients with HF, we conducted a retrospective cohort study of the association of COVID-19 vaccination status with hospitalizations, intensive care unit admission and mortality after adjustment for covariates. Inverse probability treatment-weighted models were used to adjust for potential confounding.

Results

Of 7094 patients with HF, 645 (9.1%) were partially vaccinated, 2200 (31.0%) were fully vaccinated, 1053 were vaccine-boosted (14.8%), and 3196 remained unvaccinated (45.1%) by January 2022. The mean age was 73.3 ± 14.5 years, and 48% were female. Lower mortality rates were observed in patients who were vaccine-boosted, followed by those who were fully vaccinated; they experienced lower mortality rates (HR 0.33; CI 0.23, 0.48) and 0.36 (CI 0.30, 0.43), respectively, compared to unvaccinated individuals (P< 0.001) over the mean follow-up time of 276.5 ± 104.9 days, whereas no difference was observed between those who were unvaccinated or only partially vaccinated.

Conclusion

COVID-19 vaccination was associated with significant reduction in all-cause hospitalization rates and mortality rates, lending further evidence to support the importance of vaccination implementation in the high-risk population of patients living with HF.

SUBMITTER: Johnson KW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9178679 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCOVID-19 may negatively impact the prognosis of patients with chronic HFrEF and vice versa.MethodsThis study included 2 parallel analyses of patients in the United States who were in the TriNetX health database and who underwent polymerase chain reaction testing for SARS-CoV-2 as an inpatient or outpatient between January and September of 2020. Analysis A included patients with positive tests for COVID-19 and compared patients with histories of worsening heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) (hospitalization due to heart failure (HF) or IV diuretic use during the prior 12 months), HFrEF without worsening, and no prior HF. Analysis B included patients with histories of HFrEF and compared patients with positive vs negative COVID-19 tests. Outcomes included mortality and worsening HF. In both analyses, prespecified subgroup analyses were stratified by inpatient vs outpatient settings of the COVID-19 tests.ResultsIn Analysis A, of 99,052 patients with positive COVID-19 tests, 514 (0.5%) and 524 (0.5%) patients had histories of worsening HFrEF and HFrEF without worsening, respectively. After adjustment, compared to patients without HF, worsening HFrEF (risk ratio [RR] 1.42, 95% CI 1.10-1.83; P< 0.001) and HFrEF without worsening (RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.96-1.84; P= 0.06) were associated with higher 30-day mortality rates. Excess risk of mortality tended to be pronounced in patients initially diagnosed with COVID-19 as outpatients (P for interaction, 0.12 and 0.006, respectively). In Analysis B, of 14,838 patients with HFrEF tested for COVID-19, 1038 (7.0%) had positive tests. After adjustment, testing positive was associated with excess 30-day mortality risk (RR 1.67, 95% CI 1.38-2.02; P< 0.001) and worsening HF (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.17-1.51; P< 0.001). Mortality risk was nominally more pronounced among patients presenting as outpatients (P for interaction 0.07).ConclusionIn this large cohort of patients tested for COVID-19, among patients testing positive, a history of HFrEF with or without worsening was associated with excess mortality rates, particularly among patients diagnosed with COVID-19 as outpatients. Among patients with established HFrEF, compared with testing negative, testing positive for COVID-19 was independently associated with higher risk of death and worsening HF.

Project description:ImportanceVaccination against SARS-CoV-2 has the potential to significantly reduce transmission and COVID-19 morbidity and mortality. The relative importance of vaccination strategies and nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) is not well understood.ObjectiveTo assess the association of simulated COVID-19 vaccine efficacy and coverage scenarios with and without NPIs with infections, hospitalizations, and deaths.Design, setting, and participantsAn established agent-based decision analytical model was used to simulate COVID-19 transmission and progression from March 24, 2020, to September 23, 2021. The model simulated COVID-19 spread in North Carolina, a US state of 10.5 million people. A network of 1 017 720 agents was constructed from US Census data to represent the statewide population.ExposuresScenarios of vaccine efficacy (50% and 90%), vaccine coverage (25%, 50%, and 75% at the end of a 6-month distribution period), and NPIs (reduced mobility, school closings, and use of face masks) maintained and removed during vaccine distribution.Main outcomes and measuresRisks of infection from the start of vaccine distribution and risk differences comparing scenarios. Outcome means and SDs were calculated across replications.ResultsIn the worst-case vaccination scenario (50% efficacy, 25% coverage), a mean (SD) of 2 231 134 (117 867) new infections occurred after vaccination began with NPIs removed, and a mean (SD) of 799 949 (60 279) new infections occurred with NPIs maintained during 11 months. In contrast, in the best-case scenario (90% efficacy, 75% coverage), a mean (SD) of 527 409 (40 637) new infections occurred with NPIs removed and a mean (SD) of 450 575 (32 716) new infections occurred with NPIs maintained. With NPIs removed, lower efficacy (50%) and higher coverage (75%) reduced infection risk by a greater magnitude than higher efficacy (90%) and lower coverage (25%) compared with the worst-case scenario (mean [SD] absolute risk reduction, 13% [1%] and 8% [1%], respectively).Conclusions and relevanceSimulation outcomes suggest that removing NPIs while vaccines are distributed may result in substantial increases in infections, hospitalizations, and deaths. Furthermore, as NPIs are removed, higher vaccination coverage with less efficacious vaccines can contribute to a larger reduction in risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection compared with more efficacious vaccines at lower coverage. These findings highlight the need for well-resourced and coordinated efforts to achieve high vaccine coverage and continued adherence to NPIs before many prepandemic activities can be resumed.