ABSTRACT
OBJETIVO: Determinar la percepción de los médicos internos residentes (MIR) de cardiología de España sobre el efecto de la pandemia por COVID-19 en su formación y la adaptación realizada por sus servicios. MÉTODOS: Estudio de corte transversal a través de una plataforma de encuesta digital con el objetivo de conocer la opinión individual de los MIR de cardiología sobre la influencia de la pandemia en su formación. Se realiza un análisis estadístico para determinar los factores que influyeron en la percepción de la formación afectada. RESULTADOS: Participó un total de 180 MIR de las 17 comunidades autónomas (CA). Los MIR de tercer año fueron los más afectados, junto con los que rotaban en imagen cardíaca. Los residentes de las CA con una prevalencia >5 casos/1,000 habitantes fueron los que mayor probabilidad tuvieron de ser desplazados de sus servicios. CONCLUSIONES: Según la opinión de los participantes, el efecto de la pandemia por COVID-19 en su formación fue más negativa en los residentes de tercer año y los que rotaban en imagen cardíaca. OBJECTIVE: The objectives were to analyze the perception of the Cardiology Fellows in Training (FIT) of Spain about the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on their academic training and to know the adaptative changes performed by their department. METHODS: A cross-sectional study performed through a digital survey platform for Cardiology FIT. Chi2 analysis and logistic regression were performed to determine the factors that influenced on the perception of an affected training. RESULTS: A total of 180 FIT from the 17 regions of Spain participated. Third year FIT and those rotating in cardiac imaging were the most affected with statistically significant difference. The residents of the regions with a prevalence of >5 cases/1,000 inhabitants were the most likely to be displaced from their departments. CONCLUSIONS: According to the opinion of the participants, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on their academic training was more negative in third year FITs and those rotating in cardiac imaging.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cardiology , Cardiology/education , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Internship and Residency , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , SpainABSTRACT
The renin-aldosterone-angiotensin system (RAAS) plays an important role in the pathogenesis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which is caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) is the cellular receptor for SARS-CoV-2 and the host's expression of this membrane-bound protein could affect susceptibility to infection. The RAAS is an important regulator of cardiovascular physiology and ACE2 has an essential role. People with hypertension and other traits have shown to have an imbalance in ACE/ACE2 levels and reduced levels of ACE2 could enhance the risk of adverse outcome in patients with COVID-19. It has been hypothesised that the RAAS may mediate the interplay between cardiovascular disease and COVID-19 severity. Evidence shows that antihypertensive drugs that target the RAAS have no significant effect on the risk of infection and disease outcome. Variations in RAAS genes have been associated with the risk of developing hypertension and cardiovascular disease and could partly explain the heterogenous response to SARS-CoV-2 infection. This article explores the interplay between the RAAS and COVID-19, with emphasis on the possible relationship between genetic variations and disease severity.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 outbreak has had an unclear impact on the treatment and outcomes of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). The aim of this study was to assess changes in STEMI management during the COVID-19 outbreak. METHODS: Using a multicenter, nationwide, retrospective, observational registry of consecutive patients who were managed in 75 specific STEMI care centers in Spain, we compared patient and procedural characteristics and in-hospital outcomes in 2 different cohorts with 30-day follow-up according to whether the patients had been treated before or after COVID-19. RESULTS: Suspected STEMI patients treated in STEMI networks decreased by 27.6% and patients with confirmed STEMI fell from 1305 to 1009 (22.7%). There were no differences in reperfusion strategy (> 94% treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention in both cohorts). Patients treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention during the COVID-19 outbreak had a longer ischemic time (233 [150-375] vs 200 [140-332] minutes, P < .001) but showed no differences in the time from first medical contact to reperfusion. In-hospital mortality was higher during COVID-19 (7.5% vs 5.1%; unadjusted OR, 1.50; 95%CI, 1.07-2.11; P < .001); this association remained after adjustment for confounders (risk-adjusted OR, 1.88; 95%CI, 1.12-3.14; P = .017). In the 2020 cohort, there was a 6.3% incidence of confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection during hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: The number of STEMI patients treated during the current COVID-19 outbreak fell vs the previous year and there was an increase in the median time from symptom onset to reperfusion and a significant 2-fold increase in the rate of in-hospital mortality. No changes in reperfusion strategy were detected, with primary percutaneous coronary intervention performed for the vast majority of patients. The co-existence of STEMI and SARS-CoV-2 infection was relatively infrequent.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 outbreak has had an unclear impact on the treatment and outcomes of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). The aim of this study was to assess changes in STEMI management during the COVID-19 outbreak. METHODS: Using a multicenter, nationwide, retrospective, observational registry of consecutive patients who were managed in 75 specific STEMI care centers in Spain, we compared patient and procedural characteristics and in-hospital outcomes in 2 different cohorts with 30-day follow-up according to whether the patients had been treated before or after COVID-19. RESULTS: Suspected STEMI patients treated in STEMI networks decreased by 27.6% and patients with confirmed STEMI fell from 1305 to 1009 (22.7%). There were no differences in reperfusion strategy (> 94% treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention in both cohorts). Patients treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention during the COVID-19 outbreak had a longer ischemic time (233 [150-375] vs 200 [140-332] minutes, P<.001) but showed no differences in the time from first medical contact to reperfusion. In-hospital mortality was higher during COVID-19 (7.5% vs 5.1%; unadjusted OR, 1.50; 95%CI, 1.07-2.11; P <.001); this association remained after adjustment for confounders (risk-adjusted OR, 1.88; 95%CI, 1.12-3.14; P=.017). In the 2020 cohort, there was a 6.3% incidence of confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection during hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: The number of STEMI patients treated during the current COVID-19 outbreak fell vs the previous year and there was an increase in the median time from symptom onset to reperfusion and a significant 2-fold increase in the rate of in-hospital mortality. No changes in reperfusion strategy were detected, with primary percutaneous coronary intervention performed for the vast majority of patients. The co-existence of STEMI and SARS-CoV-2 infection was relatively infrequent.