BackgroundCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has produced a significant health burden worldwide, especially in patients with cardiovascular comorbidities. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the impact of underlying cardiovascular comorbidities and acute cardiac injury on in-hospital mortality risk.MethodsPubMed, Embase and Web of Science were searched for publications that reported the relationship of underlying cardiovascular disease (CVD), hypertension and myocardial injury with in-hospital fatal outcomes in patients with COVID-19. The ORs were extracted and pooled. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed to explore the potential sources of heterogeneity.ResultsA total of 10 studies were enrolled in this meta-analysis, including eight studies for CVD, seven for hypertension and eight for acute cardiac injury. The presence of CVD and hypertension was associated with higher odds of in-hospital mortality (unadjusted OR 4.85, 95% CI 3.07 to 7.70; I2=29%; unadjusted OR 3.67, 95% CI 2.31 to 5.83; I2=57%, respectively). Acute cardiac injury was also associated with a higher unadjusted odds of 21.15 (95% CI 10.19 to 43.94; I2=71%).ConclusionCOVID-19 patients with underlying cardiovascular comorbidities, including CVD and hypertension, may face a greater risk of fatal outcomes. Acute cardiac injury may act as a marker of mortality risk. Given the unadjusted results of our meta-analysis, future research are warranted.

BackgroundThe association between dyslipidemia, a major risk factor for cardiovascular diseases, and atrial fibrillation (AF) is not clear because of limited evidence.Hypothesis.Dyslipidemia may be associated with increased risk of AF in a Chinese population.MethodsA total of 88 785 participants free from AF at baseline (2006–2007) were identified from the Kailuan Study. Fasting levels of total cholesterol (TC), low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL‐C), high‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL‐C), and triglycerides (TG) were measured at baseline using standard procedures. The study population was stratified based on quartiles of lipid profile. Incident AF was ascertained from electrocardiograms at biennial follow‐up visits (2008–2015). The associations between incident AF and the different lipid parameters (TC, LDL‐C, HDL‐C, and TG) were assessed by Cox proportional hazards regression analysis.ResultsOver a mean follow‐up period of 7.12 years, 328 subjects developed AF. Higher TC (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.60, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.43‐0.84) and LDL‐C (HR: 0.60, 95% CI: 0.43‐0.83) levels were inversely associated with incident AF after multivariable adjustment. HDL‐C and TG levels showed no association with newly developed AF. The results remained consistent after exclusion of individuals with myocardial infarction or cerebral infarction, or those on lipid‐lowering therapy. Both TC/HDL‐C and LDL‐C/HDL‐C ratios were inversely associated with risk of AF (per unit increment, HR: 0.88, 95% CI: 0.79‐0.98 and HR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.66‐0.91, respectively).ConclusionsTC and LDL‐C levels were inversely associated with incident AF, whereas no significant association of AF with HDL‐C or TG levels was observed.

No abstract

Heart failure (HF) is a major epidemic with rising morbidity and mortality rates that encumber global healthcare systems. While some studies have demonstrated the value of CRP in predicting (i) the development of HFpEF and (ii) long-term clinical outcomes in HFpEF patients, others have shown no such correlation. As a result, we conducted the following systematic review and meta-analysis to assess both the diagnostic and prognostic role of CRP in HFpEF. PubMed and Embase were searched for studies that assess the relationship between CRP and HFpEF using the following search terms: (((C-reactive protein) AND ((preserved ejection fraction) OR (diastolic heart failure))). The search period was from the start of database to August 6, 2019, with no language restrictions. A total of 312 and 233 studies were obtained from PubMed and Embase respectively, from which 19 studies were included. Our meta-analysis demonstrated the value of a high CRP in predicting the development of not only new onset HFpEF (HR: 1.08; 95% CI: 1.00-1.16; P = 0.04; I 2 = 22%), but also an increased risk of cardiovascular mortality when used as a categorical (HR: 2.52; 95% CI: 1.61-3.96; P < 0.0001; I 2 = 19%) or a continuous variable (HR: 1.24; 95% CI: 1.04-1.47; P = 0.01; I 2 = 28%), as well as all-cause mortality when used as a categorical (HR: 1.78; 95% CI: 1.53-2.06; P < 0.00001; I 2 = 0%) or a continuous variable: (HR: 1.06; 95% CI: 1.02-1.06; P = 0.003; I 2 = 61%) in HFpEF patients. CRP can be used as a biomarker to predict the development of HFpEF and long-term clinical outcomes in HFpEF patients, in turn justifying its use as a simple, accessible parameter to guide clinical management in this patient population. However, more prospective studies are still required to not only explore the utility and dynamicity of CRP in HFpEF but also to determine whether risk stratification algorithms incorporating CRP actually provide a material benefit in improving patient prognosis.

No abstract