Background: Information on the cardiac manifestations of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is scarce. We performed a systematic and comprehensive echocardiographic evaluation of consecutive patients hospitalized with COVID-19 infection. Methods: One hundred consecutive patients diagnosed with COVID-19 infection underwent complete echocardiographic evaluation within 24 hours of admission and were compared with reference values. Echocardiographic studies included left ventricular (LV) systolic and diastolic function and valve hemodynamics and right ventricular (RV) assessment, as well as lung ultrasound. A second examination was performed in case of clinical deterioration. Results: Thirty-two patients (32%) had a normal echocardiogram at baseline. The most common cardiac pathology was RV dilatation and dysfunction (observed in 39% of patients), followed by LV diastolic dysfunction (16%) and LV systolic dysfunction (10%). Patients with elevated troponin (20%) or worse clinical condition did not demonstrate any significant difference in LV systolic function compared with patients with normal troponin or better clinical condition, but they had worse RV function. Clinical deterioration occurred in 20% of patients. In these patients, the most common echocardiographic abnormality at follow-up was RV function deterioration (12 patients), followed by LV systolic and diastolic deterioration (in 5 patients). Femoral deep vein thrombosis was diagnosed in 5 of 12 patients with RV failure. Conclusions: In COVID-19 infection, LV systolic function is preserved in the majority of patients, but LV diastolic function and RV function are impaired. Elevated troponin and poorer clinical grade are associated with worse RV function. In patients presenting with clinical deterioration at follow-up, acute RV dysfunction, with or without deep vein thrombosis, is more common, but acute LV systolic dysfunction was noted in ≈20%.

Purpose Information regarding the use of lung ultrasound (LUS) in patients with Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is quickly accumulating, but its use for risk stratification and outcome prediction has yet to be described. We performed the first systematic and comprehensive LUS evaluation of consecutive patients hospitalized with COVID-19 infection, in order to describe LUS findings and their association with clinical course and outcome. Methods Between 21/03/2020 and 04/05/2020, 120 consecutive patients admitted to the Tel Aviv Medical Center due to COVID-19, underwent complete LUS within 24 h of admission. A second exam was performed in case of clinical deterioration. LUS score of 0 (best)—36 (worst) was assigned to each patient. LUS findings were compared with clinical data. Results The median baseline total LUS score was 15, IQR [7–20]. Baseline LUS score was 0–18 in 80 (67%) patients, and 19–36 in 40 (33%) patients. The majority had patchy pleural thickening (n = 100; 83%), or patchy subpleural consolidations (n = 93; 78%) in at least one zone. The prevalence of pleural thickening, subpleural consolidations and the total LUS score were all correlated with severity of illness on admission. Clinical deterioration was associated with increased follow-up LUS scores (p = 0.0009), mostly due to loss of aeration in anterior lung segments. The optimal cutoff point for LUS score was 18 (sensitivity = 62%, specificity = 74%). Both mortality and need for invasive mechanical ventilation were increased with baseline LUS score > 18 compared to baseline LUS score 0–18. Unadjusted hazard ratio of death for LUS score was 1.08 per point [1.02–1.16], p = 0.008; Unadjusted hazard ratio of the composite endpoint (death or need for invasive mechanical ventilation) for LUS score was 1.12 per point [1.05–1.2], p = 0.0008. Conclusion Hospitalized patients with COVID-19, at all clinical grades, present with pathological LUS findings. Baseline LUS score strongly correlates with the eventual need for invasive mechanical ventilation and is a strong predictor of mortality. Routine use of LUS may guide patients’ management strategies, as well as resource allocation in case of surge capacity.

Cardiovascular diseases are the leading cause of death worldwide. Research in the last two decades has emphasized the inflammatory process as a key component in the pathogenesis of many of them. The Interleukin-1 family is a pivotal element of inflammation and has been well studied as a therapeutic target in various inflammatory states. Recent trials have explored the effect of Interleukin-1 blockade in cardiovascular diseases and initial evidence of the relevance of such treatment in this field of medicine accumulate. This review will describe the role of Interleukin-1 in heart diseases and the potential therapeutic effect of its blockade in such diseases.

Background: The scope of pericardial involvement in COVID‐19 infection is unknown. We aimed to evaluate the prevalence, associates, and clinical impact of pericardial involvement in hospitalized patients with COVID‐19. Methods and Results: Consecutive patients with COVID‐19 underwent clinical and echocardiographic examination, irrespective of clinical indication, within 48 hours as part of a prospective predefined protocol. Protocol included clinical symptoms and signs suggestive of pericarditis, calculation of modified early warning score, ECG and echocardiographic assessment for pericardial effusion, left and right ventricular systolic and diastolic function, and hemodynamics. We identified predictors of mortality and assessed the adjunctive value of pericardial effusion on top of clinical and echocardiographic parameters. The study included 530 patients. Pericardial effusion was found in 75 (14%), but only 17 patients (3.2%) fulfilled the criteria for acute pericarditis. Pericardial effusion was independently associated with modified early warning score, brain natriuretic peptide, and right ventricular function. It was associated with excess mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 2.44; P =0.0005) in nonadjusted analysis. In multivariate analysis adjusted for modified early warning score and echocardiographic and hemodynamic parameters, it was marginally associated with mortality (HR, 1.86; P =0.06) and improvement in the model fit ( P =0.07). Combined assessment for pericardial effusion with modified early warning score, left ventricular ejection fraction, and tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion was an independent predictor of outcome (HR, 1.86; P =0.02) and improved model fit ( P =0.02). Conclusions: In hospitalized patients with COVID‐19, pericardial effusion is prevalent, but rarely attributable to acute pericarditis. It is associated with myocardial dysfunction and mortality. A limited echocardiographic examination, including left ventricular ejection fraction, tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion, and assessment for pericardial effusion, can contribute to outcome prediction.