The role of anticoagulation in preventing myocardial infarction and improving outcomes in COVID-19 patients
Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with cardiovascular (CV) complications including myocardial injury, myocarditis, arrhythmias, and venous thromboembolism. The infection is more severe in patients with pre-existing cardiovascular disease (CVD), where systemic inflammation...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Herzschrittmachertherapie & Elektrophysiologie 2021-09, Vol.32 (3), p.365-370 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Background
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with cardiovascular (CV) complications including myocardial injury, myocarditis, arrhythmias, and venous thromboembolism. The infection is more severe in patients with pre-existing cardiovascular disease (CVD), where systemic inflammation due to cytokine storm, hypercoagulation, as well as high hematocrit and platelet (PLT) count may contribute to an increased CV risk. The authors hypothesize that anticoagulants and antiplatelets prevent miocardial infarction (MI) in patients with pre-existing CVD.
Methods
A cohort study enrolled patients with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19. Clinical and laboratory data, total and CV mortality, as well as MI incidence and treatment regimens were compared according to the time of hospitalization: 40-day period in April–May (Group 1) and in October–November (Group 2).
Results
A total of 195 patients were enrolled: 93 in Group 1, with 36.5%, and 102 in Group 2 with 38.2% pre-existing CVD. Group 1 was managed with infusion therapy; only 10.7% received anticoagulation. Group 2 received preventive anticoagulants, antiplatelets, and infusion therapy. In Group 1, seven cases of MI were recorded compared to only three in Group 2. No significant difference in overall mortality (4.3% vs 6.86%,
p
= 0.441) and MI incidence (7.5% vs 2.9%,
p
= 0.149) was found, but significant differences were seen in the incidence of severe and critically ill cases between the groups (69.9% and 7.5% vs 75.5% and 20.6%,
p
|
---|---|
ISSN: | 0938-7412 1435-1544 |
DOI: | 10.1007/s00399-021-00786-z |