Background: To investigate deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), we performed a single institutional study to evaluate its prevalence, risk factors, prognosis, and potential thromboprophylaxis strategies in a large referral and treatment center. Methods: We studied a total of 143 patients with COVID-19 from January 29, 2020 to February 29, 2020. Demographic and clinical data, laboratory data, including ultrasound scans of the lower extremities, and outcome variables were obtained, and comparisons were made between groups with and without DVT. Results: Of the 143 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 (age 63±14 years, 74 [51.7%] men), 66 patients developed lower extremity DVT (46.1%: 23 [34.8%] with proximal DVT and 43 [65.2%] with distal DVT). Compared with patients who did not have DVT, patients with DVT were older and had a lower oxygenation index, a higher rate of cardiac injury, and worse prognosis, including an increased proportion of deaths (23 [34.8%] versus 9 [11.7%]; P =0.001) and a decreased proportion of patients discharged (32 [48.5%] versus 60 [77.9%]; P 1.0 μg/mL (odds ratio, 5.818; P 1.0 μg/mL has a sensitivity of 88.52% and a specificity of 61.43% for screening for DVT. In the subgroup of patients with a Padua prediction score ≥4 and whose ultrasound scans were performed >72 hours after admission, DVT was present in 18 (34.0%) patients in the subgroup receiving venous thromboembolism prophylaxis versus 35 (66.0%) patients in the nonprophylaxis group ( P =0.010). Conclusions: The prevalence of DVT is high and is associated with adverse outcomes in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism may be protective in patients with a Padua protection score ≥4 after admission. Our data seem to suggest that COVID-19 is probably an additional risk factor for DVT in hospitalized patients.

Background: Bedside lung ultrasound (LUS) has emerged as a useful and non-invasive tool to detect lung involvement and monitor changes in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the clinical significance of the LUS score in patients with COVID-19 remains unknown. We aimed to investigate the prognostic value of the LUS score in patients with COVID-19. Method: The LUS protocol consisted of 12 scanning zones and was performed in 280 consecutive patients with COVID-19. The LUS score based on B-lines, lung consolidation and pleural line abnormalities was evaluated. Results: The median time from admission to LUS examinations was 7 days (interquartile range [IQR] 3–10). Patients in the highest LUS score group were more likely to have a lower lymphocyte percentage (LYM%); higher levels of D-dimer, C-reactive protein, hypersensitive troponin I and creatine kinase muscle-brain; more invasive mechanical ventilation therapy; higher incidence of ARDS; and higher mortality than patients in the lowest LUS score group. After a median follow-up of 14 days [IQR, 10–20 days], 37 patients developed ARDS, and 13 died. Patients with adverse outcomes presented a higher rate of bilateral involvement; more involved zones and B-lines, pleural line abnormalities and consolidation; and a higher LUS score than event-free survivors. The Cox models adding the LUS score as a continuous variable (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.05, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 1.02 ~ 1.08; P < 0.001; Akaike information criterion [AIC] = 272; C-index = 0.903) or as a categorical variable (HR 10.76, 95% CI 2.75 ~ 42.05; P = 0.001; AIC = 272; C-index = 0.902) were found to predict poor outcomes more accurately than the basic model (AIC = 286; C-index = 0.866). An LUS score cut-off > 12 predicted adverse outcomes with a specificity and sensitivity of 90.5% and 91.9%, respectively. Conclusions: The LUS score devised by our group performs well at predicting adverse outcomes in patients with COVID-19 and is important for risk stratification in COVID-19 patients.

Right ventricular–pulmonary artery coupling (RV-PA coupling) refers to the relationship between RV contractility and RV afterload. Normal RV-PA coupling is maintained only when RV function and pulmonary vascular resistance are appropriately matched. RV-PA uncoupling occurs when RV contractility cannot increase to match RV afterload, resulting in RV dysfunction and right heart failure. RV-PA coupling plays an important role in the pathophysiology and progression of cardiovascular diseases. Therefore, early and accurate evaluation of RV-PA coupling is of great significance for a patient’s condition assessment, clinical decision making, risk stratification, and prognosis judgment. RV-PA coupling can be assessed by using invasive or noninvasive approaches. The aim of this review was to summarize the pathological mechanism and evaluation methods of RV-PA coupling, the advantages and disadvantages of each method, and the application value of RV-PA coupling in various cardiovascular diseases.

Heart failure (HF) is an extremely major health problem with gradually increasing incidence in developed and developing countries. HF may lead to cardiac remodeling; thus, advanced imaging techniques are required to comprehensively evaluate cardiac mechanics. Recently, three-dimensional speckle-tracking echocardiography (3D-STE) has been developed as a novel imaging technology that is based on the three-dimensional speckle-tracking on the full volume three-dimensional datasets. Three-dimensional speckle-tracking echocardiography allows a more accurate evaluation of global and regional myocardial performance, assessment of cardiac mechanics, detection of subclinical cardiac dysfunction, and prediction of adverse clinical events in a variety of cardiovascular diseases. Therefore, this review summarizes the clinical usefulness of 3D-STE in patients with HF.