Why the study?
The prevalence and prognostic value of chronic heart failure in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection had seldom been studied.
Does pre-existing chronic heart failure increase 30-day mortality in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection?
Does pre-existing chronic heart failure increase 30-day mortality in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection?
Pre-existing chronic heart failure is associated with a more than two-fold increased risk of 30-day mortality in patients hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 infection, with NT-proBNP providing additional prognostic value.
Patients with pre-existing CHF face high COVID-19 mortality; observational data leaves open whether optimized management improves outcomes.
BACKGROUND: The prevalence and prognostic value of chronic heart failure (CHF) in the setting of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection has seldom been studied. The aim of this study was to analyze the prevalence and prognosis of CHF in this setting. METHODS: This single-center study included 829 consecutive patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection from February to April 2020. Patients with a previous history of CHF were matched 1:2 for age and sex. We analyze the prognostic value of pre-existing CHF. Prognostic implications of N terminal pro brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels on admission in the CHF cohort were explored. RESULTS: = 0.014). CHF was independently associated with 30-day mortality (hazard ratio (HR) 2.3, confidence interval (CI) 95%: 1.26-2.4). Patients with CHF and high-sensitivity troponin T < 14 ng/L showed excellent prognosis. An NT-proBNP level > 2598 pg/mL on admission was associated with higher 30-day mortality in patients with CHF. CONCLUSIONS: All-cause mortality in CHF patients hospitalized due to SARS-CoV-2 infection was 51.2%. CHF was independently associated with all-cause mortality (HR 2.3, CI 95% 1.26-4.2). NT-proBNP levels could be used for stratification risk purposes to guide medical decisions if larger studies confirm this finding.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tornero et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: