12
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
3 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Reply to the Letter regarding the Published Article “Evaluation of Aortic Elasticity Parameters in Survivors of COVID-19 Using Echocardiography Imaging”

      research-article
      *
      Medical Principles and Practice
      S. Karger AG

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Dear Editor, Thank you for this opportunity to clarify concerns about the methodology of our study. We thank the authors for taking the time to express their views on our article. The authors of the letter have noted that there is a lack of data on the pre-COVID-19 vascular/health status of the cases, making it impossible to draw a definitive conclusion. They have also emphasized that there may be a risk of developing other concomitant medical problems during this time, resulting in altered aortic elasticity when evaluation is undertaken for a certain period of time after infection. As described in the Methodology section of our article, we excluded patients with a history of cerebrovascular disease, severe renal and liver failure, malignant disease, atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter, hypertension and diabetes mellitus, heart failure, moderate or severe heart valve stenosis or insufficiency, history of coronary artery bypass surgery, prosthetic heart valves, connective tissue diseases such as Marfan syndrome, ascending aorta >40 mm, bicuspid aortic valve; we attempted to exclude all clinical factors that may affect aortic elasticity based on broad exclusion criteria. In addition, considering the mean age of the patients in our study, it is one of our important advantages that it consists of young patients. Patient groups with similar demographic characteristics were included in the study [1]. As we did not have a chance to know who will be exposed to the SARS-CoV-2 virus, we aimed to minimize all clinical conditions that may affect aortic elasticity. The patients included in the study were patients in our pandemic hospital who had regular check-ups after recovering from COVID-19; they had no medical problems during the follow-up period that could affect aortic elasticity. Moreover, although the patients were included in the study at different time points between 3 and 6 months after diagnosis, the absence of correlation between aortic elasticity and the time elapsed since the diagnosis of COVID-19 in our correlation analysis indicates that the damage is not associated with time and is stable. Similar to our study results, a recent study showed impaired endothelial functions and arterial stiffness in COVID-19 survivors 4 months after infection [2]. Conflict of Interest Statement The authors have no conflict of interests to declare. Funding Sources None.

          Related collections

          Most cited references2

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found

          Association of COVID‐19 with impaired endothelial glycocalyx, vascular function and myocardial deformation four months after infection

          Aims SARS‐CoV‐2 infection may lead to endothelial and vascular dysfunction. We investigated alterations of arterial stiffness, endothelial coronary and myocardial function markers four months after COVID‐19 infection. Methods and Results In a case‐control prospective study, we included 70 patients four months after COVID‐19 infection, 70 age‐ and sex‐matched untreated hypertensive patients (positive control) and 70 healthy individuals. We measured a) perfused boundary region (PBR) of the sublingual arterial microvessels (increased PBR indicates reduced endothelial glycocalyx thickness), b) flow‐mediated dilation (FMD), c) coronary Flow Reserve (CFR) by Doppler echocardiography d) pulse wave velocity (PWV) e) global left (LV) and right (RV) ventricular longitudinal strain (GLS) and f) malondialdehyde (MDA), an oxidative stress marker, thrombomodulin and von Willebrand factor (vWF) as endothelial biomarkers. COVID‐19 patients had similar CFR and FMD with hypertensives (2.48±0.41 vs 2.58±0.88, p=0.562, 5.86±2.82% vs 5.80±2.07%, p=0.872 respectively) but lower values than controls (3.42±0.65, p=0.0135, 9.06±2.11%, p=0.002 respectively). Compared to controls, both COVID‐19 and hypertensives had greater PBR5‐25 (2.07±0.15μm and 2.07±0.26μm p=0.8 vs 1.89±0.17μm, p=0.001), higher PWV (PWVc‐f 12.09±2.50 vs 11.92±2.94, p=0.7 vs 10.04±1.80m/sec, p=0.036) and impaired LV and RV GLS (‐19.50 ±2.56% vs −19.23±2.67%, p=0.864 vs −21.98±1.51%, p=0.020 and ‐16.99±3.17% vs ‐18.63±3.20%, p=0.002 vs ‐20.51±2,.28%, p<0.001). MDA and thrombomodulin were higher in COVID‐19 patients than both hypertensives and controls (10.67±2.75 vs 1.76± 0.30, p=0.003 vs 1.01±0.50nmole/L, p=0.001 and 3716.63±188.36 vs 3114.46±179.18, p=0.017 vs 2590.02±156.51pg/ml, p<0.001). Residual cardiovascular symptoms at 4 months were associated with oxidative stress and endothelial dysfunction markers. Conclusions SARS‐CoV‐2 may cause endothelial and vascular dysfunction linked to impaired cardiac performance four months after infection.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Evaluation of Aortic Elasticity Parameters in Survivors of COVID-19 Using Echocardiography Imaging

            Objective While severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) primarily affects lung tissue, it may cause direct or indirect damage to the cardiovascular system, and permanent damage may occur. Arterial stiffness is an early indicator of cardiovascular disease risk. The aim of our study was to establish the potential effects of SARS-CoV-2 on the vascular system evaluated by transthoracic echocardiographic examination. Subjects and Methods This study compared arterial stiffness between the survivors of COVID-19 and those without a history of COVID-19 infection. The difference in aortic diameter was examined using echocardiography. Results The study included 50 patients who survived COVID-19 in the last 3–6 months and 50 age- and gender-matched healthy volunteers. In surviving COVID-19 patients, aortic diastolic diameter in cm ([3.1 ± 0.2] vs. [2.9 ± 0.1], p < 0.001), pulse pressure (PP) ([43.02 ± 14.05] vs. [35.74 ± 9.86], p = 0.004), aortic distensibility ([5.61 ± 3.57] vs. [8.31 ± 3.82], p < 0.001), aortic strain ([10.56 ± 4.91] vs. [13.88 ± 5.86], p = 0.003), PP/stroke volume index ([1.25 ± 0.47] vs. [0.98 ± 0.28], p = 0.001), and aortic stiffness index ([2.82 ± 0.47] vs. [2.46 ± 0.45], p < 0.001) were statistically significant compared to the control group. Conclusion SARS-CoV-2 may cause reduced or impaired aortic elasticity parameters linked to impaired arterial wall function in COVID-19 survivors compared with controls.
              Bookmark

              Author and article information

              Journal
              Med Princ Pract
              Med Princ Pract
              MPP
              Medical Principles and Practice
              S. Karger AG (Allschwilerstrasse 10, P.O. Box · Postfach · Case postale, CH–4009, Basel, Switzerland · Schweiz · Suisse, Phone: +41 61 306 11 11, Fax: +41 61 306 12 34, karger@karger.com )
              1011-7571
              1423-0151
              25 April 2022
              25 April 2022
              : 23
              : 1
              Affiliations
              Research and Training Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University, Çanakkale, Turkey
              Author notes
              Article
              mpp-0023-0001
              10.1159/000524696
              9148892
              35468614
              87b2b9dc-751a-4d25-8562-06bde8625e68
              Copyright © 2022 by S. Karger AG, Basel

              This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC). Usage and distribution for commercial purposes requires written permission. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

              History
              : 24 March 2022
              : 4 April 2022
              Page count
              References: 2, Pages: 1
              Categories
              Letter to the Editor

              Comments

              Comment on this article