ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic severely impacted global health. The aim of this study was to compare predictors of symptoms-to-emergency-call timing delay in Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS) and their impact on mortality before and during the COVID-19 outbreak. METHODS: We collected sociodemographic, clinical data, procedural features, pre-admission and intra-hospital outcomes of consecutive patients admitted for ACS in seventeen Italian centers from March to April 2018, 2019, and 2020. RESULTS: In 2020, a 32.92% reduction in ACS admissions was observed compared to 2018 and 2019. Unstable angina, typical and atypical symptoms, and intermittent angina were identified as significant predictors of symptoms-to-emergency-call timing delay before and during the COVID-19 pandemic (p<0.005 for all the items). Differently from 2018-2019, during the pandemic, hypertension and dyspnea (p=0.002 versus [vs] p=0.490 and p=0.001 vs p=0.761 for 2018-2019 and 2020, respectively) did not result as predictors of delay in symptoms-to-emergency-call timing. Among these predictors, only the atypical symptoms (HR 3.36; 95% CI 1.172 - 9.667, p=0.024) in 2020 and the dyspnea (HR 2.64; 95% CI 1.345 - 5.190, p=0.005) in 2018-2019 resulted significantly associated with higher mortality. Finally, the family attendance at the onset of the symptoms resulted in a reduction in symptoms-to-emergency-call timing (in 2020 p<0.001; CI -1710.73; -493.19) and in a trend of reduced mortality (HR 0.31; 95% CI 0.089 - 1.079, p=0.066) in 2020. CONCLUSIONS: During the COVID-19 outbreak, atypical symptoms and family attendance at ACS onset were identified, respectively, as adverse and favorable predictors of symptoms-to-emergencycall timing delay and mortality.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic increased the complexity of the clinical management and pharmacological treatment of patients presenting with an Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS). AIM: to explore the incidence and prognostic impact of in-hospital bleeding in patients presenting with ACS before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We evaluated in-hospital Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) major and minor bleeding among 2851 patients with ACS from 17 Italian centers during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic (i.e., March-April 2020) and in the same period in the previous two years. RESULTS: The incidence of in-hospital TIMI major and minor bleeding was similar before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. TIMI major or minor bleeding was associated with a significant threefold increase in all-cause mortality, with a similar prognostic impact before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: the incidence and clinical impact of in-hospital bleeding in ACS patients was similar before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. We confirmed a significant and sizable negative prognostic impact of in-hospital bleeding in ACS patients.
ABSTRACT
Aims Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic has dramatically changed the management and the prognosis of patients experiencing acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Several scientific societies have highlighted the need for dedicated paths to deliver better and faster care to improve outcomes. Nevertheless, data depicting the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on ACS in Italy are still poor. To perform a propensity weighted analysis on a multicentre Italian registry involving patients with ACS managed before vs. during COVID-19 pandemic, taking into account baseline patients characteristics, clinical presentation, procedural aspects, and in-hospital outcomes (death, bleeding, stent thrombosis, myocardial infarction, stroke/transient ischaemic attack, mechanical complication, and arrhythmic complication). Methods and results We included all consecutive patients who have suffered from ACS during two periods before (March/April 2018, March/April 2019) vs. the period of COVID-19 pandemic (March/April 2020). A generalized boosted non-parsimonious regression was used to estimate the propensity scores of having an ACS in 2020 (year of COVID-19) vs. 2018/2019 using an average treatment effect and balancing for all baseline confounders. We included 2851 patients admitted to hospital with ACS in 17 Italian centres: 1079 (37.8%) during 2018, 1056 (37.0%) in 2019, and 716 (25.1%) during the first COVID-19 wave of 2020. Seventy (2.5%) patients had a positive swab for SARS-CoV-2 at admission. During 2020 there were higher time-to-emergency-call (P = 0.028) and less diagnosis of unstable angina (P = 0.029) and MINOCA (P = 0.004);none of the admission symptoms differ significantly across the years (P > 0.05) except for fever that was more prevalent in 2020 (P < 0.001). Patients suffering from ACS had lower admission EF (P = 0.006). After PS weighting, multivariate Cox regression analysis showed age (P < 0.001), night admission (P = 0.017), cardiocirculatory arrest before cath-lab (P = 0.041), worst Killip class (P = 0.039), admission EF (P = 0.026), and need for left-ventricle mechanical support (P = 0.011) as independent predictors of in-hospital death. After propensity weighted analysis none of the in-hospital outcomes differed significantly across the years of investigation (all P > 0.05). Conclusions During COVID-19 pandemic in Italy the characteristics and management of ACS was slightly different than the past. However, the rates of ‘hard’, in-hospital outcomes (e.g. deaths) are almost similar to the past, suggesting appropriate care and well-organized emergency-paths for ACS.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Cardiology divisions reshaped their activities during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. This study aimed to analyze the organization of echocardiographic laboratories and echocardiography practice during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy, and the expectations for the post-COVID era. METHODS: We analyzed two different time periods: the month of November during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic (2020) and the identical month during 2019 (November 2019). RESULTS: During the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, the hospital activity was partially reduced in 42 (60%) and wholly interrupted in 3 (4%) echocardiographic laboratories, whereas outpatient echocardiographic activity was partially reduced in 41 (59%) and completely interrupted in 7 (10%) laboratories. We observed an important change in the organization of activities in the echocardiography laboratory which reduced the operator-risk and improved self-protection of operators by using appropriate personal protection equipment. Operators wore FFP2 in 58 centers (83%) during trans-thoracic echocardiography (TTE), in 65 centers (93%) during transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) and 63 centers (90%) during stress echocardiography. The second wave caused a significant reduction in number of echocardiographic exams, compared to November 2019 (from 513 ± 539 to 341 ± 299 exams per center, -34%, p < 0.001). On average, there was a significant increase in the outpatient waiting list for elective echocardiographic exams (from 32.0 ± 28.1 to 45.5 ± 44.9 days, +41%, p < 0.001), with a reduction of in-hospital waiting list (2.9 ± 2.4 to 2.4 ± 2.0 days, -17%, p < 0.001). We observed a large diffusion of point-of-care cardiac ultrasound (88%), with a significant increase of lung ultrasound usage in 30 centers (43%) during 2019, extended to all centers in 2020. Carbon dioxide production by examination is an indicator of the environmental impact of technology (100-fold less with echocardiography compared to other cardiac imaging techniques). It was ignored in 2019 by 100% of centers, and currently it is considered potentially crucial for decision-making in cardiac imaging by 65 centers (93%). CONCLUSIONS: In one year, major changes occurred in echocardiography practice and culture. The examination structure changed with extensive usage of point-of-care cardiac ultrasound and with lung ultrasound embedded by default in the TTE examination, as well as the COVID-19 testing.
ABSTRACT
Background After the coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak, social isolation measures were introduced to contain infection. Although there is currently a slowing down of the infection, a reduction of hospitalizations, especially for myocardial infarction, was observed. The aim of our study is to evaluate the impact of the infectious disease on ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) care during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, through the analysis of recent cases of patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention. Methods and Results Consecutive patients affected by STEMI from March 1 to 31, 2020, during social restrictions of Italian government, were collected and compared with patients with STEMI treated during March 2019. During March 2020, we observed a 63% reduction of patients with STEMI who were admitted to our catheterization laboratory, when compared with the same period of 2019 (13 versus 35 patients). Changes in all time components of STEMI care were notably observed, particularly for longer median time in symptom-to-first medical contact, spoke-to-hub, and the cumulative symptom-to-wire delay. Procedural data and in-hospital outcomes were similar between the 2 groups, whereas the length of hospitalization was longer in patients of 2020. In this group, we also observed higher levels of cardiac biomarkers and a worse left ventricular ejection fraction at baseline and discharge. Conclusions The coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak induced a reduction of hospital access for STEMI with an increase in treatment delay, longer hospitalization, higher levels of cardiac biomarkers, and worse left ventricular function.