Full author information is available at the end of the article Greet Van den Berghe, Alexander Wilmer, Rik Gosselink and Greet Hermans have equally contributed. The members of the COVID-19 consortium are listed in "Acknowledgements".
Background Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a frequent complication of COVID-19, so that the importance of adequate in-hospital thromboprophylaxis in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 is well established. However, the incidence of VTE after discharge and whether postdischarge thromboprophylaxis is beneficial and safe are unclear. In this prospective observational single-center study, we report the incidence of VTE 6 weeks after hospitalization and the use of postdischarge thromboprophylaxis.
Methods Patients hospitalized with confirmed COVID-19 were invited to a multidisciplinary follow-up clinic 6 weeks after discharge. D-dimer and C-reactive protein were measured, and all patients were screened for deep vein thrombosis with venous duplex-ultrasound. Additionally, selected high-risk patients received computed tomography pulmonary angiogram or ventilation–perfusion (V/Q) scan to screen for incidental pulmonary embolism.
Results Of 485 consecutive patients hospitalized from March through June 2020, 146 patients were analyzed, of which 39% had been admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). Postdischarge thromboprophylaxis was prescribed in 28% of patients, but was used more frequently after ICU stay (61%) and in patients with higher maximal D-dimer and C-reactive protein levels during hospitalization. Six weeks after discharge, elevated D-dimer values were present in 32% of ward and 42% of ICU patients. Only one asymptomatic deep vein thrombosis (0.7%) and one symptomatic pulmonary embolism (0.7%) were diagnosed with systematic screening. No bleedings were reported.
Conclusion In patients who had been hospitalized with COVID-19, systematic screening for VTE 6 weeks after discharge revealed a low incidence of VTE. A strategy of selectively providing postdischarge thromboprophylaxis in high-risk patients seems safe and potentially effective.
Aims
Patients presenting with cardiogenic shock (CS) related to acute, severe mitral regurgitation (MR) are often considered too ill for immediate surgical intervention. Therefore, other less invasive techniques for haemodynamic stabilization should be explored. The purpose of this exploratory study was to investigate the feasibility and outcomes in patients with CS due to severe MR by using a novel approach combining haemodynamic stabilization with left Impella-support plus MR-reduction using MitraClip®.
Methods and results
We analysed whether a combined left Impella®/MitraClip®-procedure in a rare population of CS-patients with acute MR requiring mechanical ventilation is a feasible strategy to recovery in patients who had been declined cardiac surgery. Six INTERMACS-1 CS-patients with acute MR were studied at two tertiary cardiac intensive care units. The mean EURO-II score was 39 ± 19% and age 66.8 ± 4.9 years. All patients had an initial pulmonary capillary wedge pressure >20 mmHg and pulmonary oedema necessitating invasive ventilation. Cardiac output was severely impaired (left ventricular outflow tract velocity time index 9.8 ± 1.8 cm), requiring mechanical circulatory support (MCS) (Impella®-CP; mean flow 2.9 ± 1.8 L per minute; mean support 9.7 ± 6.0 days). Despite MCS-guided unloading, weaning from ventilation failed due to persisting pulmonary oedema necessitating MR-reduction. In all cases, the severe MR was reduced to mild using percutaneous MitraClip®-procedure, followed by successful weaning from invasive ventilation. Survival to discharge was 86%, with all surviving and rare readmission for heart failure at 6 months.
Conclusions
A combined Impella®/MitraClip®-strategy appears a novel, feasible alternative for weaning CS-patients presenting with acute, severe MR. Upfront Impella®-stabilization facilitates safe bridging to Mitraclip®-procedure and the staged approach facilitates successful weaning from ventilatory support.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.