Current best evidence for clinical care (more info)
Early risk stratification for complications and death related to Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection is needed. Because many patients with COVID-19 who developed acute respiratory distress syndrome have diffuse alveolar inflammatory damage associated with microvessel thrombosis, we aimed to investigate a common clinical tool, the CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc, to aid in the prognostication of outcomes for COVID-19 patients. We analyzed consecutive patients from the multicenter observational CORACLE registry, which contains data of patients hospitalized for COVID-19 infection in 4 regions of Italy, according to data-driven tertiles of CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc score. The primary outcomes were inpatient death and a composite of inpatient death or invasive ventilation. Of 1045 patients in the registry, 864 (82.7%) had data available to calculate CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc score and were included in the analysis. Of these, 167 (19.3%) died, 123 (14.2%) received invasive ventilation, and 249 (28.8%) had the composite outcome. Stratification by CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc tertiles (T1: =1; T2: 2 to 3; T3: =4) revealed increases in both death (8.1%, 24.3%, 33.3%, respectively; p <0.001) and the composite end point (18.6%, 31.9%, 43.5%, respectively; p <0.001). The odds ratios for mortality and the composite end point for T2 patients versus T1 CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc score were 3.62 (95% CI:2.29 to 5.73,p <0.001) and 2.04 (95% CI:1.42 to 2.93, p <0.001), respectively. Similarly, the odds ratios for mortality and the composite end point for T3 patients versus T1 were 5.65 (95% CI:3.54 to 9.01, p <0.001) and 3.36 (95% CI:2.30 to 4.90,p <0.001), respectively. In conclusion, among Italian patients hospitalized for COVID-19 infection, the CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc risk score for thromboembolic events enhanced the ability to achieve risk stratification for complications and death.
|Discipline / Specialty Area||Score|
This is one more prognostic score to help risk stratify patients with COVID-19. The next step is to study the outcome of interventions based on this (& other) risk score.
I'm unsure how useful and generalisable this is.
I consider this excellent methodological work, and an interesting contribution to the identification of risk scales in COVID-19 patients.