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.

Background: Management of acute type A intramural hematoma (IMH) is a controversial topic. In our study, we aim to analyze the survival outcomes in local patients with acute type A IMH and a meta-analysis on survival in type A IMH treated medically versus surgically was performed. Methods: From 2014 to 2019, 65 patients with acute type A IMH were selected for analysis. Primary outcome of interest was 1 year all cause survival. The rate of aortic-related events in the medical group was evaluated. PubMed and Embase were searched for meta-analysis. Results: The mean age of our cohort was 61.7±9.7 years. Of the 65 patients, 40% had emergency operation. Overall 1-year survival was 96.9%. The 1-year survival was 94.9% for the medical group. 46.2% of the medical group required aortic intervention at a mean duration of 191±168 days. Maximal aortic diameter (MAD) ≥45 mm was predictive of aortic-related events in the medical group (OR: 7.0; 95% CI, 1.7-29.4; P=0.008). For the meta-analysis, 21 studies were identified, and 900 patients were included.Emergent surgery was associated with improved survival in type A IMH (OR: 0.76; 95% CI, 0.29-1.97, P=0.58; I 2 =27%). Conclusions: The 1-year survival after type A IMH was promising, regardless of approach. The conservative-first approach was found to be safe & feasible, and upfront surgery remained the management of choice in general. Patients with MAD ≥45 mm was associated with subsequent aortic intervention in the medical-first group.

Introduction Cancer patients may be susceptible to poorer outcomes in COVID‐19 infection owing to the immunosuppressant effect of chemotherapy/radiotherapy and cancer growth, along with the potential for nosocomial transmission due to frequent hospital admissions. Methods This was a population‐based retrospective cohort study of COVID‐19 patients who presented to Hong Kong public hospitals between 1 January 2020 and 8 December 2020. The primary outcome was a composite endpoint of requirement for intubation, ICU admission and 30‐day mortality. Results The following study consisted of 6089 COVID‐19 patients (median age 45.9 [27.8.1–62.7] years; 50% male), of which 142 were cancer subjects. COVID‐19 cancer patients were older at baseline and tended to present with a higher frequency of comorbidities, including diabetes mellitus, hypertension, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, ischemic heart disease, ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation and gastrointestinal bleeding ( p < 0.05). These subjects also likewise tended to present with higher serum levels of inflammatory markers, including D‐dimer, lactate dehydrogenase, high sensitivity troponin‐I and C‐reactive protein. Multivariate Cox regression showed that any type of cancer presented with an almost four‐fold increased risk of the primary outcome (HR: 3.77; 95% CI: 1.63–8.72; p < 0.002) after adjusting for significant demographics, Charlson comorbidity index, number of comorbidities, past comorbidities and medication history. This association remained significant when assessing those with colorectal (HR: 5.07; 95% CI: 1.50–17.17; p < 0.009) and gastrointestinal malignancies (HR: 3.79; 95% CI: 1.12–12.88; p < 0.03), but not with lung, genitourinary, or breast malignancies, relative to their respective cancer‐free COVID‐19 counterparts. Conclusions COVID‐19 cancer patients are associated with a significantly higher risk of intubation, ICU admission and/or mortality.

BackgroundPericarditis is a relatively rare disease with a global burden. Despite its strong association with adverse cardiovascular outcomes, identification of patients at risk of future heart failure or arrhythmic events is difficult. In the following study, automated electrocardiogram (ECG) were used to predict new onset ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation (VT/VF), atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HF) in an Asian cohort of pericarditis patients.MethodsConsecutive patients admitted to a single tertiary center in Hong Kong, China, for a diagnosis of pericarditis between 1st January 2005 and 31st December 2019 with baseline ECG measurements were included. Patients with existing AF or HF were excluded. The follow-up period was until the 31st December 2020, or death. Cox regression was applied to identify significant predictors of the primary outcomes (incident VT/VF, AF or HF).ResultsA total of 874 patients were included. The cohort was 57% male and had a median age of 59 (IQR: 50-70) years old. During follow-up, 57 patients (6.5%), 156 (17.8%) and 168 (19.2%) suffered from VT/VF, AF and HF, respectively. Cox regression identified baseline VT/VF, terminal angle of the QRS vector in the transverse plane, mean QRS duration and mean QTc intervals as significant predictors of incident VT/VF events, with only the former most maintaining significance in multivariate analysis. In contrast, baseline age, prior diagnoses of hypertension, initial angle and magnitude of the QRS vector in the transverse plane, P-wave and QRS axis in the frontal plane, ST segment axis in the frontal and horizontal planes, mean PT interval, mean PR segment duration and QTc intervals were all univariate predictors of incident AF, albeit only baseline age and initial angel of the QRS vector in the transverse plane retained significance after multivariate adjustment. As it pertains to new-onset HF, several clinical and electrocardiographic parameters demonstrated an association with HF in univariate analysis, with prior diagnosis of HT or DM, initial QRS angle in transverse plane, I 40 in horizontal axis, ST-segment axis in the horizontal plane, T-wave frontal axis and atrial rate, of which, except for prior diagnosis of DM, I40 in horizontal axis and T-wave frontal axis, all variables showcased significant relationships in multivariate analysisInterpretationAF and HF are relatively common complications VT/VF occurs less frequently in the context of pericarditis. Different clinical and ECG predictors of these outcomes were identified. Future studies are still needed to evaluate their use for risk stratification in the clinical setting.