Back

Clinical features and outcomes of 2019 novel coronavirus-infected patients with cardiac injury

liu, y.; Li, J.; liu, D.; Song, H.; chen, C.; lv, M.; pei, X.; Hu, Z.

2020-03-16 infectious diseases
10.1101/2020.03.11.20030957 medRxiv
Show abstract

AimsTo explore the epidemiological and clinical features of 2019 novel coronavirus(2019-nCoV)-infected patients with cardiac injury. Methods and resultsData were collected from patients medical records, and we defined cardiac injury according to cardiac biomarker troponin I level > 0.03 g/L. Among the 291 patients, 15 (5.2%) showed evidence of cardiac injury. Of 15 hospitalized patients with cardiac injury, the median age was 65 years, and 11/15 (73.3%) were men. Underlying cardiovascular diseases in some patients were hypertension (n=7, 46.7%), coronary heart disease (n=3, 20%) and diabetes (n=3, 20%). The most common symptoms at illness onset in patients with cardiac injury were fever (n=11, 73.3%), cough (n=7, 46.7%), headache or fatigue (n=5, 33.3%) and dyspnea (n=4, 26.7%). These patients had higher systolic pressures, white blood cell count, neutrophil count, troponin I, brain natriuretic peptide, D-dimer and lower lymphocyte count, and platelet count, compared with patients without cardiac injury, respectively. Bilateral infiltrates on chest X-ray and elevated C-reactive protein occurred in all patients with cardiac injury. Compared with patients without cardiac injury, patients with cardiac injury were more likely to develop acute respiratory distress syndrome, and receive mechanical ventilation, continuous renal replacement therapy, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and vasopressor therapy and be admitted to the intensive care unit. ConclusionCardiac injury is a common condition among patients infected with 2019-nCoV. Compared with patients without cardiac injury, the clinical outcomes of patients with cardiac injury are relatively worse.

Matching journals

The top 12 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.