Explore the vast range of titles available.

Transcatheter cardiovascular interventions increasingly rely on advanced imaging. X-ray fluoroscopy provides excellent visualization of catheters and devices, but poor visualization of anatomy. In contrast, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) provides excellent visualization of anatomy and can generate real-time imaging with frame rates similar to X-ray fluoroscopy. Realization of MRI as a primary imaging modality for cardiovascular interventions has been slow, largely because existing guidewires, catheters and other devices create imaging artifacts and can heat dangerously. Nonetheless, numerous clinical centers have started interventional cardiovascular magnetic resonance (iCMR) programs for invasive hemodynamic studies or electrophysiology procedures to leverage the clear advantages of MRI tissue characterization, to quantify cardiac chamber function and flow, and to avoid ionizing radiation exposure. Clinical implementation of more complex cardiovascular interventions has been challenging because catheters and other tools require re-engineering for safety and conspicuity in the iCMR environment. However, recent innovations in scanner and interventional device technology, in particular availability of high performance low-field MRI scanners could be the inflection point, enabling a new generation of iCMR procedures. In this review we review these technical considerations, summarize contemporary clinical iCMR experience, and consider potential future applications.

Quantification of cardiac output and pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) are critical components of invasive hemodynamic assessment, and can be measured concurrently with pressures using phase contrast CMR flow during real-time CMR guided cardiac catheterization. One hundred two consecutive patients underwent CMR fluoroscopy guided right heart catheterization (RHC) with simultaneous measurement of pressure, cardiac output and pulmonary vascular resistance using CMR flow and the Fick principle for comparison. Procedural success, catheterization time and adverse events were prospectively collected. RHC was successfully completed in 97/102 (95.1%) patients without complication. Catheterization time was 20 ± 11 min. In patients with and without pulmonary hypertension, baseline mean pulmonary artery pressure was 39 ± 12 mmHg vs. 18 ± 4 mmHg (p < 0.001), right ventricular (RV) end diastolic volume was 104 ± 64 vs. 74 ± 24 (p = 0.02), and RV end-systolic volume was 49 ± 30 vs. 31 ± 13 (p = 0.004) respectively. 103 paired cardiac output and 99 paired PVR calculations across multiple conditions were analyzed. At baseline, the bias between cardiac output by CMR and Fick was 5.9% with limits of agreement −38.3% and 50.2% with r = 0.81 (p < 0.001). The bias between PVR by CMR and Fick was −0.02 WU.m2 with limits of agreement −2.6 and 2.5 WU.m2 with r = 0.98 (p < 0.001). Correlation coefficients were lower and limits of agreement wider during physiological provocation with inhaled 100% oxygen and 40 ppm nitric oxide. CMR fluoroscopy guided cardiac catheterization is safe, with acceptable procedure times and high procedural success rate. Cardiac output and PVR measurements using CMR flow correlated well with the Fick at baseline and are likely more accurate during physiological provocation with supplemental high-concentration inhaled oxygen. Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01287026, registered January 25, 2011.

Background Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) fluoroscopy allows for simultaneous measurement of cardiac function, flow and chamber pressure during diagnostic heart catheterization. To date, commercial metallic guidewires were considered contraindicated during CMR fluoroscopy due to concerns over radiofrequency (RF)-induced heating. The inability to use metallic guidewires hampers catheter navigation in patients with challenging anatomy. Here we use low specific absorption rate (SAR) imaging from gradient echo spiral acquisitions and a commercial nitinol guidewire for CMR fluoroscopy right heart catheterization in patients. Methods The low-SAR imaging protocol used a reduced flip angle gradient echo acquisition (10° vs 45°) and a longer repetition time (TR) spiral readout (10 ms vs 2.98 ms). Temperature was measured in vitro in the ASTM 2182 gel phantom and post-mortem animal experiments to ensure freedom from heating with the selected guidewire (150 cm × 0.035″ angled-tip nitinol Terumo Glidewire ). Seven patients underwent CMR fluoroscopy catheterization. Time to enter each chamber (superior vena cava, main pulmonary artery, and each branch pulmonary artery) was recorded and device visibility and confidence in catheter and guidewire position were scored on a Likert-type scale. Results Negligible heating (< 0.07°C) was observed under all in vitro conditions using this guidewire and imaging approach. In patients, chamber entry was successful in 100% of attempts with a guidewire compared to 94% without a guidewire, with failures to reach the branch pulmonary arteries. Time-to-enter each chamber was similar (p=NS) for  the two approaches. The guidewire imparted useful catheter shaft conspicuity and enabled interactive modification of catheter shaft stiffness, however, the guidewire tip visibility was poor. Conclusions Under specific conditions, trained operators can apply low-SAR imaging and using a specific fully-insulated metallic nitinol guidewire (150 cm × 0.035” Terumo Glidewire ) to augment clinical CMR fluoroscopy right heart catheterization. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03152773 , registered May 15, 2017.

Developmental programs are controlled by transcription factors and chromatin regulators, which maintain specific gene expression programs through epigenetic modification of the genome. These regulatory events at enhancers contribute to the specific gene expression programs that determine cell state and the potential for differentiation into new cell types. Although enhancer elements are known to be associated with certain histone modifications and transcription factors, the relationship of these modifications to gene expression and developmental state has not been clearly defined. Here we interrogate the epigenetic landscape of enhancer elements in embryonic stem cells and several adult tissues in the mouse. We find that histone H3K27ac distinguishes active enhancers from inactive/poised enhancer elements containing H3K4me1 alone. This indicates that the amount of actively used enhancers is lower than previously anticipated. Furthermore, poised enhancer networks provide clues to unrealized developmental programs. Finally, we show that enhancers are reset during nuclear reprogramming.

Not all patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection develop symptomatic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), making it challenging to assess the burden of COVID-19-related hospitalizations and mortality. We aimed to determine the proportion, resource utilization, and outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 positive patients admitted for COVID-19, and assess the impact of using the Center for Disease Control's (CDC) discharge diagnosis-based algorithm and the Massachusetts state department's drug administration-based classification system on identifying admissions for COVID-19. In this retrospective cohort study, we enrolled consecutive SARS-CoV-2 positive patients admitted to one of five hospitals in British Columbia between December 19, 2021 and May 31,2022. We completed medical record reviews, and classified hospitalizations as being primarily for COVID-19 or with incidental SARS-CoV-2 infection. We applied the CDC algorithm and the Massachusetts classification to estimate the difference in hospital days, intensive care unit (ICU) days and in-hospital mortality and calculated sensitivity and specificity. Of 42,505 Emergency Department patients, 1,651 were admitted and tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, with 858 (52.0%, 95% CI 49.6-54.4) admitted for COVID-19. Patients hospitalized for COVID-19 required ICU admission (14.0% versus 8.2%, p<0.001) and died (12.6% versus 6.4%, p<0.001) more frequently compared with patients with incidental SARS-CoV-2. Compared to case classification by clinicians, the CDC algorithm had a sensitivity of 82.9% (711/858, 95% CI 80.3%, 85.4%) and specificity of 98.1% (778/793, 95% CI 97.2%, 99.1%) for COVID-19-related admissions and underestimated COVID-19 attributable hospital days. The Massachusetts classification had a sensitivity of 60.5% (519/858, 95% CI 57.2%, 63.8%) and specificity of 78.6% (623/793, 95% CI 75.7%, 81.4%) for COVID-19-related admissions, underestimating total number of hospital and ICU bed days while overestimating COVID-19-related intubations, ICU admissions, and deaths. Half of SARS-CoV-2 hospitalizations were for COVID-19 during the Omicron wave. The CDC algorithm was more specific and sensitive than the Massachusetts classification, but underestimated the burden of COVID-19 admissions. Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04702945.

Many health authorities differentiate hospitalizations in patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 as being “for COVID-19” (due to direct manifestations of SARS-CoV-2 infection) versus being an “incidental” finding in someone admitted for an unrelated condition. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of all SARS-CoV-2 infected patients hospitalized via 47 Canadian emergency departments, March 2020-July 2022 to determine whether hospitalizations with “incidental” SARS-CoV-2 infection are less of a burden to patients and the healthcare system. Using a priori standardized definitions applied to hospital discharge diagnoses in 14,290 patients, we characterized COVID-19 as (i) the “Direct” cause for the hospitalization (70%), (ii) a potential “Contributing” factor for the hospitalization (4%), or (iii) an “Incidental” finding that did not influence the need for admission (26%). The proportion of incidental SARS-CoV-2 infections rose from 10% in Wave 1 to 41% during the Omicron wave. Patients with COVID-19 as the direct cause of hospitalization exhibited significantly longer LOS (mean 13.8 versus 12.1 days), were more likely to require critical care (22% versus 11%), receive COVID-19-specific therapies (55% versus 19%), and die (17% versus 9%) compared to patients with Incidental SARS-CoV-2 infections. However, patients hospitalized with incidental SARS-CoV-2 infection still exhibited substantial morbidity/mortality and hospital resource use.

We estimated the operating characteristics of ICD-10 code U07.1, introduced by the World Health Organization in 2020, to identify lab-confirmed SARS-CoV-2. CCEDRRN is a national research registry of adults (March 2020–August 2021) with suspected/confirmed SARS-CoV-2 identified in Canadian emergency departments (EDs) using chart review (symptoms, clinical information, and lab test results including SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction, PCR results). CCEDRRN data were linked to administrative hospitalization discharge and ED ICD-10 diagnostic codes (accessed centrally via the Canadian Institute for Health Information). We identified ICD-10 diagnostic codes in CCEDRRN participants. We defined lab-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 based on at least one positive PCR in the 0–14 days before the ED presentation and/or during hospitalization (in those admitted from ED). We performed separate analyses for CCEDRRN participants discharged from ED and those hospitalized from the ED. Additional analyses were stratified by province, sex, age, and (for hospitalized patients) timing of the first PCR test. The sensitivity of ICD-10 code U07.1 for a positive SARS-CoV-2 test was 93.6% (95% CI 93.0–94.1%) in those hospitalized from ED and 83.0% (95% CI 82.1–83.9%) in those discharged from the ED. Sensitivity was similar across provinces and demographics, but in each stratified analysis, values were higher in those hospitalized versus those discharged from ED. The ICD-10 diagnostic code for U07.1 within administrative data identified most lab-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 within persons hospitalized from ED, although a significant number of cases discharged from ED were missed. This should be considered when using administrative data for research and public health planning.

Symptoms of the Post-COVID-19 Condition are often non-specific making it a challenge to distinguish them from symptoms due to other medical conditions. In this study, we compare the proportion of emergency department patients who developed symptoms consistent with the World Health Organization’s Post-COVID-19 Condition clinical case definition between those who tested positive for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 infection and time-matched patients who tested negative. Our results show that over one-third of emergency department patients with a proven acute infection meet Post-COVID-19 Condition criteria 3 months post-index visit. However, one in five test-negative patients who claim never having been infected also report symptoms consistent with Post-COVID-19 Condition highlighting the lack of specificity of the clinical case definition. Testing for SARS-CoV-2 during the acute phase of a suspected infection should continue until specific biomarkers of Post-COVID-19 Condition become available for diagnosis and treatment. In this study of more than 6500 emergency department patients, symptoms consistent with Long COVID are reported by 38.9% of SARS-CoV-2 test-positive and 20.7% of test-negative patients three months after their visit. A documented SARS-CoV-2 infection increased the risk fourfold of reporting Long COVID symptoms.

Importance Racial and ethnic minority groups are disproportionately affected by COVID-19. Objectives To evaluate whether rates of severe COVID-19, defined as hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, or in-hospital death, are higher among racial and ethnic minority groups compared with non-Hispanic White persons. Design, Setting, and Participants This cross-sectional study included 99 counties within 14 US states participating in the COVID-19–Associated Hospitalization Surveillance Network. Participants were persons of all ages hospitalized with COVID-19 from March 1, 2020, to February 28, 2021. Exposures Laboratory-confirmed COVID-19–associated hospitalization, defined as a positive SARS-CoV-2 test within 14 days prior to or during hospitalization. Main Outcomes and Measures Cumulative age-adjusted rates (per 100 000 population) of hospitalization, ICU admission, and death by race and ethnicity. Rate ratios (RR) were calculated for each racial and ethnic group compared with White persons. Results Among 153 692 patients with COVID-19–associated hospitalizations, 143 342 (93.3%) with information on race and ethnicity were included in the analysis. Of these, 105 421 (73.5%) were 50 years or older, 72 159 (50.3%) were male, 28 762 (20.1%) were Hispanic or Latino, 2056 (1.4%) were non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaska Native, 7737 (5.4%) were non-Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander, 40 806 (28.5%) were non-Hispanic Black, and 63 981 (44.6%) were White. Compared with White persons, American Indian or Alaska Native, Latino, Black, and Asian or Pacific Islander persons were more likely to have higher cumulative age-adjusted rates of hospitalization, ICU admission, and death as follows: American Indian or Alaska Native (hospitalization: RR, 3.70; 95% CI, 3.54-3.87; ICU admission: RR, 6.49; 95% CI, 6.01-7.01; death: RR, 7.19; 95% CI, 6.47-7.99); Latino (hospitalization: RR, 3.06; 95% CI, 3.01-3.10; ICU admission: RR, 4.20; 95% CI, 4.08-4.33; death: RR, 3.85; 95% CI, 3.68-4.01); Black (hospitalization: RR, 2.85; 95% CI, 2.81-2.89; ICU admission: RR, 3.17; 95% CI, 3.09-3.26; death: RR, 2.58; 95% CI, 2.48-2.69); and Asian or Pacific Islander (hospitalization: RR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01-1.06; ICU admission: RR, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.83-1.98; death: RR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.55-1.74). Conclusions and Relevance In this cross-sectional analysis, American Indian or Alaska Native, Latino, Black, and Asian or Pacific Islander persons were more likely than White persons to have a COVID-19–associated hospitalization, ICU admission, or in-hospital death during the first year of the US COVID-19 pandemic. Equitable access to COVID-19 preventive measures, including vaccination, is needed to minimize the gap in racial and ethnic disparities of severe COVID-19.

Some studies suggested more COVID-19-associated hospitalizations among racial and ethnic minorities. To inform public health practice, the COVID-19-associated Hospitalization Surveillance Network (COVID-NET) quantified associations between race/ethnicity, census tract socioeconomic indicators, and COVID-19-associated hospitalization rates. Using data from COVID-NET population-based surveillance reported during March 1-April 30, 2020 along with socioeconomic and denominator data from the US Census Bureau, we calculated COVID-19-associated hospitalization rates by racial/ethnic and census tract-level socioeconomic strata. Among 16,000 COVID-19-associated hospitalizations, 34.8% occurred among non-Hispanic White (White) persons, 36.3% among non-Hispanic Black (Black) persons, and 18.2% among Hispanic or Latino (Hispanic) persons. Age-adjusted COVID-19-associated hospitalization rate were 151.6 (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 147.1-156.1) in census tracts with >15.2%-83.2% of persons living below the federal poverty level (high-poverty census tracts) and 75.5 (95% CI: 72.9-78.1) in census tracts with 0%-4.9% of persons living below the federal poverty level (low-poverty census tracts). Among White, Black, and Hispanic persons living in high-poverty census tracts, age-adjusted hospitalization rates were 120.3 (95% CI: 112.3-128.2), 252.2 (95% CI: 241.4-263.0), and 341.1 (95% CI: 317.3-365.0), respectively, compared with 58.2 (95% CI: 55.4-61.1), 304.0 (95%: 282.4-325.6), and 540.3 (95% CI: 477.0-603.6), respectively, in low-poverty census tracts. Overall, COVID-19-associated hospitalization rates were highest in high-poverty census tracts, but rates among Black and Hispanic persons were high regardless of poverty level. Public health practitioners must ensure mitigation measures and vaccination campaigns address needs of racial/ethnic minority groups and people living in high-poverty census tracts.