Coronary calcium scoring assessed on native screening chest CT imaging as predictor for outcome in COVID-19: An analysis of a hospitalized German cohort.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2020
2020
Historique:
received:
18
09
2020
accepted:
15
12
2020
entrez:
30
12
2020
pubmed:
31
12
2020
medline:
12
1
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, a number of risk factors for a poor outcome have been identified. Thereby, cardiovascular comorbidity has a major impact on mortality. We investigated whether coronary calcification as a marker for coronary artery disease (CAD) is appropriate for risk prediction in COVID-19. Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 (n = 109) were analyzed regarding clinical outcome after native computed tomography (CT) imaging for COVID-19 screening. CAC (coronary calcium score) and clinical outcome (need for intensive care treatment or death) data were calculated following a standardized protocol. We defined three endpoints: critical COVID-19 and transfer to ICU, fatal COVID-19 and death, composite endpoint critical and fatal COVID-19, a composite of ICU treatment and death. We evaluated the association of clinical outcome with the CAC. Patients were dichotomized by the median of CAC. Hazard ratios and odds ratios were calculated for the events death or ICU or a composite of death and ICU. We observed significantly more events for patients with CAC above the group's median of 31 for critical outcome (HR: 1.97[1.09,3.57], p = 0.026), for fatal outcome (HR: 4.95[1.07,22.9], p = 0.041) and the composite endpoint (HR: 2.31[1.28,4.17], p = 0.0056. Also, odds ratio was significantly increased for critical outcome (OR: 3.01 [1.37, 6.61], p = 0.01) and for fatal outcome (OR: 5.3 [1.09, 25.8], p = 0.02). The results indicate a significant association between CAC and clinical outcome in COVID-19. Our data therefore suggest that CAC might be useful in risk prediction in patients with COVID-19.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, a number of risk factors for a poor outcome have been identified. Thereby, cardiovascular comorbidity has a major impact on mortality. We investigated whether coronary calcification as a marker for coronary artery disease (CAD) is appropriate for risk prediction in COVID-19.
METHODS
Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 (n = 109) were analyzed regarding clinical outcome after native computed tomography (CT) imaging for COVID-19 screening. CAC (coronary calcium score) and clinical outcome (need for intensive care treatment or death) data were calculated following a standardized protocol. We defined three endpoints: critical COVID-19 and transfer to ICU, fatal COVID-19 and death, composite endpoint critical and fatal COVID-19, a composite of ICU treatment and death. We evaluated the association of clinical outcome with the CAC. Patients were dichotomized by the median of CAC. Hazard ratios and odds ratios were calculated for the events death or ICU or a composite of death and ICU.
RESULTS
We observed significantly more events for patients with CAC above the group's median of 31 for critical outcome (HR: 1.97[1.09,3.57], p = 0.026), for fatal outcome (HR: 4.95[1.07,22.9], p = 0.041) and the composite endpoint (HR: 2.31[1.28,4.17], p = 0.0056. Also, odds ratio was significantly increased for critical outcome (OR: 3.01 [1.37, 6.61], p = 0.01) and for fatal outcome (OR: 5.3 [1.09, 25.8], p = 0.02).
CONCLUSION
The results indicate a significant association between CAC and clinical outcome in COVID-19. Our data therefore suggest that CAC might be useful in risk prediction in patients with COVID-19.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33378410
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0244707
pii: PONE-D-20-29515
pmc: PMC7773182
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0244707Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exists.
Références
JAMA Cardiol. 2020 Jul 1;5(7):819-824
pubmed: 32219357
Radiology. 2020 Apr;295(1):202-207
pubmed: 32017661
Lancet. 2020 Mar 28;395(10229):1054-1062
pubmed: 32171076
Intensive Care Med. 2020 May;46(5):846-848
pubmed: 32125452
Eur Respir J. 2020 Apr 16;55(4):
pubmed: 32269085
JAMA Cardiol. 2020 Jul 1;5(7):802-810
pubmed: 32211816
Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013 Jul;6(4):514-21
pubmed: 23756678
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2020 May;214(5):1072-1077
pubmed: 32125873
Radiology. 2020 Aug;296(2):E32-E40
pubmed: 32101510
Cardiovasc Res. 2020 Aug 1;116(10):1666-1687
pubmed: 32352535
PLoS One. 2014 Mar 13;9(3):e91239
pubmed: 24625525
JAMA. 2020 Apr 28;323(16):1574-1581
pubmed: 32250385
JAMA. 2020 Mar 17;323(11):1061-1069
pubmed: 32031570
JAMA Cardiol. 2020 Jul 1;5(7):811-818
pubmed: 32219356
Ann Intern Med. 2020 Aug 18;173(4):268-277
pubmed: 32374815
Curr Cardiol Rep. 2020 Apr 21;22(5):32
pubmed: 32318865
J Am Coll Cardiol. 1990 Mar 15;15(4):827-32
pubmed: 2407762
Am Heart J. 2014 Apr;167(4):568-75
pubmed: 24655707
N Engl J Med. 2020 Jun 25;382(26):2582
pubmed: 32501665
PLoS One. 2020 Aug 27;15(8):e0238281
pubmed: 32853230
Eur Heart J. 2020 May 14;41(19):1821-1829
pubmed: 32383763
Lancet. 2020 Feb 15;395(10223):497-506
pubmed: 31986264
J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2017 Jan - Feb;11(1):8-15
pubmed: 27743881
Lancet Respir Med. 2020 May;8(5):475-481
pubmed: 32105632
Am J Cardiol. 2003 Dec 15;92(12):1471-5
pubmed: 14675591
Am Heart J. 2008 Jan;155(1):154-60
pubmed: 18082507