Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVE:To better characterize COVID-19 patients most at risk for severe, outpatient thrombosis by defining patients hospitalized with COVID-19 with an arterial or venous thrombosis diagnosed at admission METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a single center retrospective analysis of COVID-19 patients. There was a shift in the proportions of thrombosis subtypes from 2019 to 2020, with declines in STEMI (from 22.0% to 10.1% of thrombotic events) and stroke (from 48.6% to 37.2%), and an increase in the proportion of patients with VTE (29.4% to 52.7%). COVID-associated thrombosis were younger (58 years vs. 64 years, p=0.043), trended to be less frequently female (31.3% vs. 43.9%, p =0.16), but there was no difference body mass index or major comorbidities between those with and without COVID-19. COVID-19-associted thrombosis was correlated with a higher mortality (15.2% vs. 4.3%, p=0.016). The biometric profile of patients admitted with COVID-associated thrombosis compared to regular thrombosis had significant changes in the complete blood count, liver function tests, d-dimer, c-related protein, ferritin, and coagulation panels. CONCLUSIONS:Outpatients with COVID-19 who developed thrombosis requiring hospitalization have an increased mortality over non-COVID-19 outpatients who develop thrombosis requiring hospitalization. Given the significantly higher inflammatory markers, it is possible this is related to different mechanisms of thrombotic disease in these patients. The inflammation may be a target to reduce the risk of or aid in the treatment of thrombosis. We call for more studies elucidating the role immunothrombosis maybe playing in COVID.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Venous thromboembolism, including deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, is a major source of morbidity, mortality, and healthcare utilization. Given the prevalence of venous thromboembolism and its associated mortality, our study sought to identify factors associated with loss to follow-up in venous thromboembolism patients. METHODS:-value of <0.05 set for significance. RESULTS: = 0.03) as opposed to home. CONCLUSIONS:Our study demonstrates that over one-third of patients diagnosed with venous thromboembolism at our institution are lost to venous thromboembolism-specific follow-up, particularly those discharged to a facility. Our work suggests that significant improvement could be achieved by establishing a pathway for the targeted transition of care to a venous thromboembolism-specific follow-up clinic.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:To investigate the incidence, characteristics, and outcomes of in-hospital cardiac arrest in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 and to describe the characteristics and outcomes for patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest within the ICU, compared with non-ICU patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest. Finally, we evaluated outcomes stratified by age. DATA SOURCES/METHODS:A systematic review of PubMed, EMBASE, and preprint websites was conducted between January 1, 2020, and December 10, 2020. Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews identification: CRD42020203369. STUDY SELECTION/METHODS:Studies reporting on consecutive in-hospital cardiac arrest with a resuscitation attempt among patients with coronavirus disease 2019. DATA EXTRACTION/METHODS:Two authors independently performed study selection and data extraction. Study quality was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Data were synthesized according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews guidelines. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus or through an independent third reviewer. DATA SYNTHESIS/RESULTS:Eight studies reporting on 847 in-hospital cardiac arrest were included. In-hospital cardiac arrest incidence varied between 1.5% and 5.8% among hospitalized patients and 8.0-11.4% among patients in ICU. In-hospital cardiac arrest occurred more commonly in older male patients. Most initial rhythms were nonshockable (83.9%, [asystole = 36.4% and pulseless electrical activity = 47.6%]). Return of spontaneous circulation occurred in 33.3%, with a 91.7% in-hospital mortality. In-hospital cardiac arrest events in ICU had higher incidence of return of spontaneous circulation (36.6% vs 18.7%; p < 0.001) and relatively lower mortality (88.7% vs 98.1%; p < 0.001) compared with in-hospital cardiac arrest in non-ICU locations. Patients greater than or equal to 60 years old had significantly higher in-hospital mortality than those less than 60 years (93.1% vs 87.9%; p = 0.019). CONCLUSIONS:Approximately, one in 20 patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 received resuscitation for an in-hospital cardiac arrest. Hospital survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest within the ICU was higher than non-ICU locations and seems comparable with prepandemic survival for nonshockable rhythms. Although the data provide guidance surrounding prognosis after in-hospital cardiac arrest, it should be interpreted cautiously given the paucity of information surrounding treatment limitations and resource constraints during the pandemic. Further research is into actual causative mechanisms is needed.

•COVID-19 infection is associated with a prothrombotic state•Point of care ultrasound (POCUS) provides prompt bedside diagnosis of covid-19 complications such as clot in transit•Bedside TEE guidance of mechanical CPR arm placement improves the efficiency of chest compressions.

Background/UNASSIGNED:Management of patients with acute deterioration from novel coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) has posed a particular challenge for rapid response systems (RRSs) due to increased hospital strain and direct risk of infection to RRS team members. Objective/UNASSIGNED:We sought to characterize RRS structure and protocols adaptions during the COVID-19 pandemic. Design Setting and Participants/UNASSIGNED:Internet-based cross-sectional survey of RRS leaders, physicians, and researchers across the United States. Results/UNASSIGNED:Clinicians from 46 hospitals were surveyed, 40 completed a baseline survey (87%), and 19 also completed a follow-up qualitative survey. Most reported an increase in emergency team resources during the COVID-19 pandemic. The number of sites performing simulation training sessions decreased from 88% before COVID-19 to 53% during the pandemic. Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:Most RRSs reported pandemic-related adjustments, most commonly through increasing resources and implementation of protocol changes. There was a reduction in the number of sites that performed simulation training.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) led to a large influx of critically ill patients and altered echocardiography laboratory workflow. We developed a point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) first approach to patients requiring echocardiography and describe our workflow and findings. METHODS:We performed a single-center retrospective analysis of all POCUS studies performed on critically ill patients with COVID-19. Sonography was performed by intensivists, uploaded and archived, and rapidly reviewed by echocardiographers. We evaluated each study based on the number of views obtained. Additionally, we provide a description of the workflow during the COVID-19 surge at a tertiary care hospital in New York City. RESULTS:Fifty patients had POCUS studies performed by intensivists and reviewed by echocardiographers obviating the need for sonographer-performed studies. Of the 48 cardiac POCUS studies, 17% of patients had 4 of 4 standard views available while 53% had 3 of 4 standard views. The parasternal long-axis view was obtained on 81%, subxiphoid view on 79%, apical 4-chamber view on 71%, and parasternal short-axis view on 63% of patients. CONCLUSIONS:Our POCUS workflow allowed intensivists to perform cardiac sonography for rapid bedside diagnosis of pathology with immediate interpretation performed by echocardiographers. At least 3 views were obtained in the majority of cases.

Thrombosis is a major concern in respiratory infections. Our aim was to investigate the magnitude and duration of risk for arterial and venous thrombosis following discharge after respiratory infection. Patients with respiratory infections were identified using the United States Nationwide Readmission Database from 2012 to 2014. Patients admitted with asthma or cellulitis served as comparators. Readmissions for acute myocardial infarction (MI) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) were evaluated at 30 to 180 days. The likelihood of a first thrombotic event after discharge was compared with a 30-day period prior to hospitalization. Among 5,271,068 patients discharged after a respiratory infection, 0.56% and 0.78% were readmitted within 30-days with MI and VTE, respectively. Relative to asthma and cellulitis, respiratory infection was associated with a greater age and sex-adjusted hazard of 30-day readmission for MI (adjusted HR [aHR] 1.48 [95% CI 1.42-1.54] vs. asthma; aHR 1.36 [95% CI 1.31-1.41] vs. cellulitis) and VTE (aHR 1.28 [95% CI 1.24-1.33] vs. asthma; aHR 1.26, [95% CI 1.22-1.30] vs. cellulitis). Risks of MI and VTE attenuated over time. In a crossover-cohort analysis, the odds of MI (OR 1.68 [95% CI 1.62-1.73]) and VTE (OR 3.30 [95% 3.19-3.41]) were higher in the 30 days following discharge after respiratory infection than during the 30-day baseline period. Hospitalization for respiratory infection was associated with increased risks of thrombosis that were highest in the first 30-days after discharge and declined over time.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with increased rates of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE). Pulmonary Embolism Response Teams (PERT) have previously been associated with improved outcomes. We aimed to investigate whether PERT utilization, recommendations, and outcomes for patients diagnosed with acute PE changed during the COVID-19 pandemic. This is a retrospective cohort study of all adult patients with acute PE who received care at an academic hospital system in New York City between March 1st and April 30th, 2020. These patients were compared against historic controls between March 1st and April 30th, 2019. PE severity, PERT utilization, initial management, PERT recommendations, and outcomes were compared. There were more cases of PE during the pandemic (82 vs. 59), but less PERT activations (26.8% vs. 64.4%, p < 0.001) despite similar markers of PE severity. PERT recommendations were similar before and during the pandemic; anticoagulation was most recommended (89.5% vs. 86.4%, p = 0.70). During the pandemic, those with PERT activations were more likely to be female (63.6% vs. 31.7%, p = 0.01), have a history of DVT/PE (22.7% vs. 1.7%, p = 0.01), and to be SARS-CoV-2 PCR negative (68.2% vs. 38.3% p = 0.02). PERT activation during the pandemic is associated with decreased length of stay (7.7 ± 7.7 vs. 13.2 ± 12.7 days, p = 0.02). PERT utilization decreased during the COVID-19 pandemic and its activation was associated with different biases. PERT recommendations and outcomes were similar before and during the pandemic, and led to decreased length of stay during the pandemic.

BACKGROUND:Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has caused over 1 200 000 deaths worldwide as of November 2020. However, little is known about the clinical outcomes among hospitalized patients with active COVID-19 after in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA). AIM/OBJECTIVE:We aimed to characterize outcomes from IHCA in patients with COVID-19 and to identify patient- and hospital-level variables associated with 30-day survival. METHODS:We conducted a multicentre retrospective cohort study across 11 academic medical centres in the U.S. Adult patients who received cardiopulmonary resuscitation and/or defibrillation for IHCA between March 1, 2020 and May 31, 2020 who had a documented positive test for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 were included. The primary outcome was 30-day survival after IHCA. RESULTS:There were 260 IHCAs among COVID-19 patients during the study period. The median age was 69 years (interquartile range 60-77), 71.5% were male, 49.6% were White, 16.9% were Black, and 16.2% were Hispanic. The most common presenting rhythms were pulseless electrical activity (45.0%) and asystole (44.6%). ROSC occurred in 58 patients (22.3%), 32 (12.3%) survived to 30 days, and 31 (11.9%) survived to discharge. Rates of ROSC and 30-day survival in the two hospitals with the highest volume of IHCA over the study period compared to the remaining hospitals were considerably lower (10.8% vs. 64.3% and 5.9% vs. 35.7% respectively, p < 0.001 for both). CONCLUSIONS:We found rates of ROSC and 30-day survival of 22.3% and 12.3% respectively. There were large variations in centre-level outcomes, which may explain the poor survival in prior studies.