Prior research has identified abnormal platelet procoagulant responses in COVID-19. Coated-platelets, a form of procoagulant platelets, support thrombin formation and are elevated in ischemic stroke patients with increased risk for recurrent infarction. Our goal was to examine changes in coated-platelet levels over the course of COVID-19 infection and determine their association with disease severity, thrombosis, and death. Coated-platelet levels were assayed after admission and repeated weekly in COVID-19 patients, and in COVID-19 negative controls. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to calculate area under the curve (AUC) values for a model including baseline coated-platelets to predict death. Kaplan–Meier and Cox proportional hazards analysis was used to predict risk for death at 90 days. We enrolled 33 patients (22 with moderate and 11 with severe infection) and 20 controls. Baseline coated-platelet levels were lower among moderate (mean ± SD; 21.3 ± 9.8%) and severe COVID-19 patients (28.5 ± 11.9%) compared to controls (38.1 ± 10.4%, p < 0.0001). Coated-platelet levels increased during follow-up in COVID-19 patients by 7% (relative) per day from symptom onset (95% CI 2–12%, p = 0.007). A cut-off of 33.9% for coated-platelet levels yielded 80% sensitivity and 96% specificity for death at 90 days, with resulting AUC of 0.880 (95% CI 0.680–1.0, p = 0.0002). The adjusted hazard ratio for death in patients with coated-platelet levels > 33.9% was 40.99 when compared to those with levels ≤ 33.9% (p < 0.0001). Platelet procoagulant potential is transiently decreased in most patients during COVID-19; however, increased baseline platelet procoagulant levels predict death. Defining the mechanisms involved and potential links with aging may yield novel treatment targets.

No abstract

Background: The utilization of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) significantly reduces morbidity and mortality in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Previous studies have documented the underutilization of GDMT in HFrEF. The present study aimed to determine reasons for underutilization and achievement of target doses of GDMT in patients with de novo diagnosis of HFrEF. Methods: Patients presenting with de novo HFrEF at the Veterans Affairs Medical Center were included. Baseline demographic, clinical, and echocardiographic data were collected. The utilization of target doses of GDMT was assessed at the time of discharge and 1-, 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up. Results: Of the 95 patients who met the criteria for de novo HFrEF, 48 were included in the final analysis. Dose titration of either beta-blocker or angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers (ACEi/ARB) was attempted in 20 patients (42%) at 1 month, 21 patients (44%) at 3 months, 13 patients (27%) at 6 months, and 14 patients (29%) at 12 months. Nine (19%) patients were on a target dose of beta-blockers and three (6%) patients were on a target dose of an ACEi/ARB at 12 months. The most common reasons for underutilization were patient-level factors, such as hypotension, acute kidney injury/hyperkalemia, and patient noncompliance. Conclusions: Utilization and achievement of target doses of GDMT were suboptimal among patients discharged with de novo HFrEF during a 1-year follow-up. Although patient factors may limit the up-titration of therapies, concerted efforts are needed to support primary care physicians in improving adherence to target doses of GDMT in patients with HFrEF.

Background and Objectives: The American Board of Internal Medicine's Choosing Wisely campaign recommends against ordering repetitive complete blood counts (CBC) in the face of clinical and laboratory stability. Methods: Consecutive patients admitted to a teaching team were included. Intervention 1 was an educational lecture outlining costs of and indications for CBC ordering. Intervention 2 added a simplified algorithm to help providers determine the need for a daily CBC. The primary outcome measure was the number of CBCs ordered per number of patients per day. The secondary outcome measure was net cost saved. The process measures were lecture/poster and algorithm utilization rates. The balancing measure was emergency department visits/readmissions within 7 days of discharge. A statistical process control chart was generated to assess special cause variation. Using R software version 3.5.2, a 2-sample t test and Fisher exact test differences between groups in the outcome and balancing measures. Results: One hundred ten patients were included over a 62-day period. The difference between the pre-intervention group and both interventions combined was significant (P = .000317). Special cause variation was observed after institution of both interventions in conjunction. Net costs saved totaled $43 482. Emergency department visits/readmissions within 7 days were similar between the groups (P = .1403). Conclusions: Complete blood count ordering patterns and costs were improved through education and providing a decision support tool in the form of a simplified algorithm, without increasing 7-day emergency department visits/readmissions. The algorithm, far less detailed than that previously published, still resulted in significant improvement without unintended consequences, making for a safe and potentially sustainable intervention.