Natalia Vensentini's research while affiliated with Hospital El Cruce and other places

Objetivo: El tratamiento con inhibidores de la fosfodiesterasa 5 (iFDE-5) fue postulado en la insuficiencia cardiaca (IC). Se realizó una revisión sistemática y metaanálisis sobre sus efectos beneficiosos y adversos en pacientes con IC. Método: Metaanálisis de ensayos clínicos aleatorizados que evaluaron el uso crónico de iFDE-5 en pacientes con IC. Los criterios de valoración finales incluyeron la muerte, las hospitalizaciones por IC, la capacidad funcional, las presiones y las resistencias pulmonares, la calidad de vida y los efectos adversos. Se utilizaron modelos de efectos aleatorios para agrupar los resultados. Los datos categóricos fueron resumidos como riesgos relativos (RR) e intervalos de confianza del 95% (IC95%), y los datos continuos como diferencias de medias ponderadas y diferencias de medias estandarizadas. Resultados: Se incluyeron 16 estudios (1119 participantes). No se observaron efectos sobre la mortalidad (RR: 1,16; IC95%: 0.50-2.66; I2: 0.0%) ni sobre las hospitalizaciones por IC (RR: 0,75; IC95%: 0.41-1.37; I2: 38.7%). El tratamiento redujo significativamente la presión sistólica pulmonar (−10,64 mmHg; IC95%: −5.14 a −16.15 mmHg; I2: 96.0%) e incrementó el consumo máximo de oxígeno (2.06 ml/kg/min; IC95%: 0.40-3.72 ml/kg/min; I2: 89.6%), aunque con elevada inconsistencia. No se detectaron efectos significativos sobre la calidad de vida (−0.15; IC95%: −0.48-0.18; I2: 0.0%). Por otra parte, aumentó el riesgo de cefaleas (RR: 1.63; IC95%: 1.11-2.39; I2: 0.0%). Se identificó un sesgo de publicación para las hospitalizaciones por IC. Conclusiones: Los datos actuales sugieren que el tratamiento con iFDE-5 no mejora el pronóstico ni la calidad de vida de los pacientes con IC. Los efectos hemodinámicos y funcionales podrían ser relevantes, y son necesarios más estudios para definir su rol.

Background Chagas cardiomyopathy (CHCM) is the most important clinical manifestation of Chagas disease. The analysis of cardiac miRNAs may contribute to predicting the progression to CHCM in Chagas indeterminate phase and/or to the differential diagnosis for cardiomyopathy. Methods We carried out a case-control study to identify circulating miRNAs associated with CHCM. We assigned 104 participants to four groups: healthy controls (HC), Chagas non-cardiomyopathy controls, CHCM cases, and ischemic cardiomyopathy controls. We performed a clinical, echocardiographic, and laboratory evaluation and profiled circulating miRNA in the serum samples. Results Differences between groups were observed in clinical variables and in the analysis of miRNAs. Compared to HC, CHCM participants had 4 over-expressed and 6 under-expressed miRNAs; miR-95-3p and miR-130b-3p were upregulated in CHCM compared with controls, Chagas non-cardiomyopathy and ischemic cardiomyopathy participants, suggesting that might be a hallmark of CHCM. Analysis of gene targets associated with cardiac injury yielded results of genes involved in arrhythmia generation, cardiomegaly, and hypertrophy. Conclusions Our data suggest that the expression of circulating miRNAs identified by deep sequencing in CHCM could be associated with different cardiac phenotypes in CHCM subjects, compared with Chagas non-CHCM, ischemic cardiomyopathy controls, and healthy controls.

In 2017, the World Health Organization (WHO) and Resolve to Save Lives partnered with country governments and other stakeholders to design, test, and scale up the WHO HEARTS hypertension services package in 32 low- and middle-income countries. Facility-based HEARTS performance indicators included number of patients enrolled, number treated and with blood pressure controlled, number who missed a scheduled follow-up visit, and number lost to follow-up. By 2022, HEARTS hypertension control programs treated 12.2 million patients in 165,000 primary care facilities. Hypertension control was 38% (median 48%; range 5%-86%). In 4 HEARTS countries using the same digital health information system, facility-based control improved from 18% at baseline to 46% in 48 months. At the population level, median estimated population-based hypertension control was 11.0% of all hypertension patients (range 2.0%-34.7%). The Global Hearts experience of implementing WHO HEARTS demonstrates the feasibility of controlling hypertension in low- and middle-income country primary care settings.

Guia de práctica clínica del Ministerio de Salud de la Nación Argentina sobre Prevención Cardiovascular, centrado en el primer nivel de atención de salud

Introduction: Two clinical presentations of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) have been defined: ST- segment elevation ACS (STEACS) or non-ST-segment elevation ACS (NSTEACS). The mechanism that determines the clinical presentation of ACS is not clearly understood. The aim of this study was to define the association between cardiovascular risk factors and other clinical variables with the clinical presentation of ACS as STEACS or NSTEACS. Methods: We analyzed data of patients prospectively included in the Epi-Cardio Registry with a diagnosis of ACS from April 2006 to April 2018. A total of 10 019 patients were included in the study. Results: In the multivariate analysis, male sex (OR 1.5) and active smoking (OR 1.71) were positively associated with STEACS presentation. Conversely, hypertension (OR 0.71), dyslipidemia (OR 0.74), age (OR 0.97 per quintile), history of myocardial infarction (OR 0.57), chronic angina (OR 0.44), presence of comorbidities (OR 0.64), and extension of coronary heart disease (OR 0.84) were negatively associated with STEACS. Women differed from men by presenting a higher incidence of NSTEACS, due to a greater proportion of ACS without obstructive coronary heart disease. Conclusion: Some cardiovascular risk factors and other clinical variables are independently associated with the presentation of ACS as ST EACS or NSTEACS. These findings confirm the influence of risk factors and clinical history on the pathophysiology, clinical and electrocardiographic presentation of ACS.

The clinical presentation of acute coronary syndromes (ACS) as ST-elevation ACS (STEACS) or non-ST-elevation ACS (NSTEACS) differs between women and men. The aim of this study was to describe the difference in the clinical presentation of ACS between sexes. A total of 10,019 patients included in the Epi-Cardio Registry were analyzed. A higher proportion of women than men presented with NSTEACS (60.3% vs. 46.7%; p <0.001). The difference between sexes was driven by a higher prevalence of ACS with non-obstructive coronary arteries (20.9% vs. 6.6%) mainly in young women, since ACS without coronary lesions were mostly NSTEACS (77.7% vs. 22.3%). In patients with obstructive coronary heart disease, there were no differences in the clinical presentation between sexes. In conclusion, younger women are more likely than men to present ACS with non-obstructive coronary arteries, whereas no significant difference exists between sexes regarding the prevalence of ACS with obstructive coronary artery disease.

Background The role of oral vitamin D3 supplementation for hospitalized patients with COVID-19 remains to be determined. The study was aimed to evaluate whether vitamin D3 supplementation could prevent respiratory worsening among hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Methods and findings We designed a multicentre, randomized, double-blind, sequential, placebo-controlled clinical trial. The study was conducted in 17 second and third level hospitals, located in four provinces of Argentina, from 14 August 2020 to 22 June 2021. We enrolled 218 adult patients, hospitalized in general wards with SARS-CoV-2 confirmed infection, mild-to-moderate COVID-19 and risk factors for disease progression. Participants were randomized to a single oral dose of 500 000 IU of vitamin D3 or matching placebo. Randomization ratio was 1:1, with permuted blocks and stratified for study site, diabetes and age (≤60 vs >60 years). The primary outcome was the change in the respiratory Sepsis related Organ Failure Assessment score between baseline and the highest value recorded up to day 7. Secondary outcomes included the length of hospital stay; intensive care unit admission; and in-hospital mortality. Overall, 115 participants were assigned to vitamin D3 and 105 to placebo (mean [SD] age, 59.1 [10.7] years; 103 [47.2%] women). There were no significant differences in the primary outcome between groups (median [IQR] 0.0 [0.0–1.0] vs 0.0 [0.0–1.0], for vitamin D3 and placebo, respectively; p = 0.925). Median [IQR] length of hospital stay was not significantly different between vitamin D3 group (6.0 [4.0–9.0] days) and placebo group (6.0 [4.0–10.0] days; p = 0.632). There were no significant differences for intensive care unit admissions (7.8% vs 10.7%; RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.32 to 1.70; p = 0.622), or in-hospital mortality (4.3% vs 1.9%; RR 2.24; 95% CI 0.44 to 11.29; p = 0.451). There were no significant differences in serious adverse events (vitamin D3 = 14.8%, placebo = 11.7%). Conclusions Among hospitalized patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 and risk factors, a single high oral dose of vitamin D3 as compared with placebo, did not prevent the respiratory worsening. Trial registration ClincicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04411446.

Background: The role of oral vitamin D3 supplementation for hospitalized patients with COVID-19 remains to be determined. The study was aimed to evaluate whether vitamin D3 supplementation could prevent respiratory worsening among hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Methods and Findings: We designed a multicentre, randomized, double-blind, sequential, placebo-controlled clinical trial. The study was conducted in 17 second and third level hospitals, located in four provinces of Argentina, from 14 August 2020 to 22 June 2021. We enrolled 218 adult patients, hospitalized in general wards with SARS-CoV-2 confirmed infection, mild-to-moderate COVID-19 and risk factors for disease progression. Participants were randomized to a single oral dose of 500 000 IU of vitamin D3 or matching placebo. Randomization ratio was 1:1, with permuted blocks and stratified for study site, diabetes and age (≤60 vs >60 years). The primary outcome was the change in the respiratory Sepsis related Organ Failure Assessment score between baseline and the highest value recorded up to day 7. Secondary outcomes included the length of hospital stay; intensive care unit admission; and in-hospital mortality. Overall, 115 participants were assigned to vitamin D3 and 105 to placebo (mean [SD] age, 59.1 [10.7] years; 103 [47.2%] women). There were no significant differences in the primary outcome between groups (median [IQR] 0.0 [0.0 - 1.0] vs 0.0 [0.0 - 1.0], for vitamin D3 and placebo, respectively; p = 0.925). Median [IQR] length of hospital stay was not significantly different between vitamin D3 group (6.0 [4.0 - 9.0] days) and 4 placebo group (6.0 [4.0 - 10.0] days; p = 0.632). There were no significant differences for intensive care unit admissions (7.8% vs 10.7%; RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.32 to 1.70; p = 0.622), or in-hospital mortality (4.3% vs 1.9%; RR 2.24; 95% CI 0.44 to 11.29; p = 0.451). There were no significant differences in serious adverse events (vitamin D3= 14.8%, placebo=11.7%). Conclusions: Among hospitalized patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 and risk factors, a single high oral dose of vitamin D3 as compared with placebo, did not prevent the respiratory worsening.

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to measures of social isolation, labor restrictions, a strong information campaign and the suspension of scheduled medical activities. The aim of this study was to describe the impact of these measures on the number of hospitalizations in Cardiovascular Intensive Care Units, with the hypothesis that the social behavior generated by this emergency promotes a decreased demand for medical care, even when severe cardiovascular disease is involved. We compared the number of admissions in March-April 2010-2019 versus March-April 2020, based on a prospective study including six institutions (three public and three private) that use Epi-Cardio® as a multicenter registry of cardiovascular care unit discharge. Altogether, we included 6839 patients discharged during the 11-year study period (2010-2020). The average number of patient admissions on March-April 2010-19 was 595 (CI 95%: 507-683) and decreased to 348 in 2020 (fall of 46.8%, p < 0.001). The reasons for hospitalization were classified into 11 groups and a statistically significant reduction was seen in 10 of these groups: cardiovascular surgery 72.3%, electrophysiological interventions 67.8%, non-ST acute coronary syndromes 52.6%, angioplasties 47.6%, arrhythmias 48.7%, heart failure 46%, atrial fibrillation 35.7%, ST elevation myocardial infarction 34.7%, non cardiac chest pain 31.8%, others 51.6%. Although with low prevalence, hypertensive crisis increased in 89%. The abrupt decrease observed in the number of admissions due to critical pathologies may be considered an "adverse effect" related to the measures adopted, with potentially severe consequences. This trend could be reversed by improving public communication and policy adjustment.