Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) and neonates (MIS-N) associated with COVID-19: optimizing definition and management.

During the SARS-CoV-2-associated infection (COVID-19), pandemic initial reports suggested relative sparing of children inversely related to their age. Children and neonates have a decreased incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection, and if infected they manifested a less severe phenotype, in part due to enhanced innate immune response. However, a multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) or paediatric inflammatory multisystem syndrome temporally associated with SARS-CoV-2 emerged involving coronary artery aneurysms, cardiac dysfunction, and multiorgan inflammatory manifestations. MIS-C has many similarities to Kawasaki disease and other inflammatory conditions and may fit within a spectrum of inflammatory conditions based on immunological results. More recently neonates born to mothers with SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy demonstrated evidence of a multisystem inflammatory syndrome with raised inflammatory markers and multiorgan, especially cardiac dysfunction that has been described as multisystem inflammatory syndrome in neonates (MIS-N). However, there is a variation in definitions and management algorithms for MIS-C and MIS-N. Further understanding of baseline immunological responses to allow stratification of patient groups and accurate diagnosis will aid prognostication, and inform optimal immunomodulatory therapies. IMPACT: Multisystem inflammatory system in children and neonates (MIS-C and MIS-N) post COVID require an internationally recognized consensus definition and international datasets to improve management and plan future clinical trials. This review incorporates the latest review of pathophysiology, clinical information, and management of MIS-C and MIS-N. Further understanding of the pathophysiology of MIS-C and MIS-N will allow future targeted therapies to prevent and limit clinical sequelae.

Severity of maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection and perinatal outcomes of women admitted to hospital during the omicron variant dominant period using UK Obstetric Surveillance System data: prospective, national cohort study

Objectives To describe the severity of maternal infection when the omicron SARS-CoV-2 variant (B.1.1.529) was dominant (15 December 2021 to 14 March 2022) and describe outcomes by symptoms and vaccination status. Design Prospective, national cohort study using the UK Obstetric Surveillance System. Setting 94 hospitals in the UK with a consultant led maternity unit. Participants Pregnant women admitted to hospital for any cause with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test. Main outcome measures Symptomatic or asymptomatic infection, vaccination status by doses before admission, and severity of maternal infection (moderate or severe infection according to modified World Health Organization's criteria). Results Of 3699 women who were admitted to hospital, 986 (26.7%, 95% confidence interval 25.3% to 28.1%) had symptoms;of these, 144 (14.6%, 12.5% to 17.0%) had a moderate to severe infection, 99 (10.4%, 8.6% to 12.5%) of 953 received respiratory support, and 30 (3.0%, 2.1% to 4.3%) were admitted to an intensive care unit. Covid-19 specific drug treatment was given to 13 (43.3%) of the 30 women in intensive care. Four women with symptoms died (0.4%, 0.1% to 1.1%). Vaccination status was known for 845 (85.6%) women with symptoms;489 (58.9%) were unvaccinated and only 55 (6.5%) had three doses. Moderate to severe infection was reported for 93 (19.0%) of 489 unvaccinated women with symptoms, decreasing to three (5.5%) of 55 after three doses. Among the 30 women with symptoms who were admitted to intensive care, 23 (76.7%) were unvaccinated and none had received three doses. Conclusion Most women with severe covid-19 disease were unvaccinated and vaccine coverage among pregnant women admitted to hospital with SARS-CoV-2 was low. Ongoing action to prioritise and advocate for vaccine uptake in pregnancy is essential. A better understanding of the persistent low use of drug treatments is an urgent priority. Trial registration ISRCTN 40092247.

The Direct and Indirect Effects of COVID-19 on Acute Coronary Syndromes.

The novel SARS-CoV-2 has directly and indirectly impacted patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic correlated with an abrupt decline in hospitalizations with ACS and increased out-of-hospital deaths. Worse outcomes in ACS patients with concomitant COVID-19 have been reported, and acute myocardial injury secondary to SARS-CoV-2 infection is recognized. A rapid adaptation of existing ACS pathways has been required such that overburdened health care systems may manage both a novel contagion and existing illness. As SARS-CoV-2 is now endemic, future research is required to better define the complex interplay of COVID-19 infection and cardiovascular disease.

Neonatal outcomes and indirect consequences following maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: To identify the association between maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy and individual neonatal morbidities and outcomes, particularly longer-term outcomes such as neurodevelopment. DESIGN: Systematic review of outcomes of neonates born to pregnant women diagnosed with a SARS-CoV-2 infection at any stage during pregnancy, including asymptomatic women. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, Global Health, WHOLIS and LILACS databases, last searched on 28 July 2021. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Case-control and cohort studies published after 1 January 2020, including preprint articles were included. Study outcomes included neonatal mortality and morbidity, preterm birth, caesarean delivery, small for gestational age, admission to neonatal intensive care unit, level of respiratory support required, diagnosis of culture-positive sepsis, evidence of brain injury, necrotising enterocolitis, visual or hearing impairment, neurodevelopmental outcomes and feeding method. These were selected according to a core outcome set. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data were extracted into Microsoft Excel by two researchers, with statistical analysis completed using IBM SPSS (Version 27). Risk of bias was assessed using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. RESULTS: The search returned 3234 papers, from which 204 were included with a total of 45 646 infants born to mothers with SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy across 36 countries. We found limited evidence of an increased risk of some neonatal morbidities, including respiratory disease. There was minimal evidence from low-income settings (1 study) and for neonatal outcomes following first trimester infection (17 studies). Neonatal mortality was very rare. Preterm birth, neonatal unit admission and small for gestational age status were more common in infants born following maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy in most larger studies. CONCLUSIONS: There are limited data on neonatal morbidity and mortality following maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection, particularly from low-income countries and following early pregnancy infections. Large, representative studies addressing these outcomes are needed to understand the consequences for babies born to women with SARS-CoV-2. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021249818.

Neonatal outcomes of maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection in the UK: a prospective cohort study using active surveillance.

BACKGROUND: Newborns may be affected by maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy. We aimed to describe the epidemiology, clinical course and short-term outcomes of babies admitted to a neonatal unit (NNU) following birth to a mother with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection within 7 days of birth. METHODS: This is a UK prospective cohort study; all NHS NNUs, 1 March 2020 to 31 August 2020. Cases were identified via British Paediatric Surveillance Unit with linkage to national obstetric surveillance data. Reporting clinicians completed data forms. Population data were extracted from the National Neonatal Research Database. RESULTS: A total of 111 NNU admissions (1.98 per 1000 of all NNU admissions) involved 2456 days of neonatal care (median 13 [IQR 5, 34] care days per admission). A total of 74 (67%) babies were preterm. In all, 76 (68%) received respiratory support; 30 were mechanically ventilated. Four term babies received therapeutic hypothermia for hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy. Twenty-eight mothers received intensive care, with four dying of COVID-19. Eleven (10%) babies were SARS-CoV-2 positive. A total of 105 (95%) babies were discharged home; none of the three deaths before discharge was attributed to SARS-CoV-2. CONCLUSION: Babies born to mothers with SARS-CoV-2 infection around the time of birth accounted for a low proportion of total NNU admissions over the first 6 months of the UK pandemic. Neonatal SARS-CoV-2 was uncommon. STUDY REGISTRATION: ISRCTN60033461; protocol available at http://www.npeu.ox.ac.uk/pru-mnhc/research-themes/theme-4/covid-19 . IMPACT: Neonatal unit admissions of babies born to mothers with SARS-CoV-2 infection comprised only a small proportion of total neonatal admissions in the first 6 months of the pandemic. A high proportion of babies requiring neonatal admission who were born to mothers with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were preterm and had neonatal SARS-CoV-2 infection and/or other conditions associated with long-term sequelae. Adverse neonatal conditions were more common in babies whose SARS-CoV-2-positive mothers required intensive care compared to those whose SARS-CoV-2-positive mothers who did not.

Adverse maternal, fetal, and newborn outcomes among pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2 infection: an individual participant data meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Despite a growing body of research on the risks of SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy, there is continued controversy given heterogeneity in the quality and design of published studies. METHODS: We screened ongoing studies in our sequential, prospective meta-analysis. We pooled individual participant data to estimate the absolute and relative risk (RR) of adverse outcomes among pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2 infection, compared with confirmed negative pregnancies. We evaluated the risk of bias using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. RESULTS: We screened 137 studies and included 12 studies in 12 countries involving 13 136 pregnant women.Pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2 infection-as compared with uninfected pregnant women-were at significantly increased risk of maternal mortality (10 studies; n=1490; RR 7.68, 95% CI 1.70 to 34.61); admission to intensive care unit (8 studies; n=6660; RR 3.81, 95% CI 2.03 to 7.17); receiving mechanical ventilation (7 studies; n=4887; RR 15.23, 95% CI 4.32 to 53.71); receiving any critical care (7 studies; n=4735; RR 5.48, 95% CI 2.57 to 11.72); and being diagnosed with pneumonia (6 studies; n=4573; RR 23.46, 95% CI 3.03 to 181.39) and thromboembolic disease (8 studies; n=5146; RR 5.50, 95% CI 1.12 to 27.12).Neonates born to women with SARS-CoV-2 infection were more likely to be admitted to a neonatal care unit after birth (7 studies; n=7637; RR 1.86, 95% CI 1.12 to 3.08); be born preterm (7 studies; n=6233; RR 1.71, 95% CI 1.28 to 2.29) or moderately preterm (7 studies; n=6071; RR 2.92, 95% CI 1.88 to 4.54); and to be born low birth weight (12 studies; n=11 930; RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.40). Infection was not linked to stillbirth. Studies were generally at low or moderate risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis indicates that SARS-CoV-2 infection at any time during pregnancy increases the risk of maternal death, severe maternal morbidities and neonatal morbidity, but not stillbirth or intrauterine growth restriction. As more data become available, we will update these findings per the published protocol.

Confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in Scottish neonates 2020-2022: a national, population-based cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To examine neonates in Scotland aged 0-27 days with SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed by viral testing; the risk of confirmed neonatal infection by maternal and infant characteristics; and hospital admissions associated with confirmed neonatal infections. DESIGN: Population-based cohort study. SETTING AND POPULATION: All live births in Scotland, 1 March 2020-31 January 2022. RESULTS: There were 141 neonates with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection over the study period, giving an overall infection rate of 153 per 100 000 live births (141/92 009, 0.15%). Among infants born to women with confirmed infection around the time of birth, the confirmed neonatal infection rate was 1812 per 100 000 live births (15/828, 1.8%). Two-thirds (92/141, 65.2%) of neonates with confirmed infection had an associated admission to neonatal or (more commonly) paediatric care. Six of these babies (6/92, 6.5%) were admitted to neonatal and/or paediatric intensive care; however, none of these six had COVID-19 recorded as their main diagnosis. There were no neonatal deaths among babies with confirmed infection. IMPLICATIONS AND RELEVANCE: Confirmed neonatal SARS-CoV-2 infection was uncommon over the first 23 months of the pandemic in Scotland. Secular trends in the neonatal confirmed infection rate broadly followed those seen in the general population, although at a lower level. Maternal confirmed infection at birth was associated with an increased risk of neonatal confirmed infection. Two-thirds of neonates with confirmed infection had an associated admission to hospital, with resulting implications for the baby, family and services, although their outcomes were generally good. Ascertainment of confirmed infection depends on the extent of testing, and this is likely to have varied over time and between groups: the extent of unconfirmed infection is inevitably unknown.

Effect of SARS-CoV-2 infection in neonates or in pregnancy on developmental outcomes at 21-24 months (SINEPOST): study protocol for a prospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Exposure to SARS-CoV-2 during pregnancy or in the neonatal period may impact fetal or neonatal brain development either through direct central nervous system infection or indirectly through the adverse effects of viral infection-related inflammation in the mother or newborn infant. This study aims to determine whether there are early neurodevelopmental effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a prospective national population-based cohort study of children aged 21-24 months who were born at term (≥37 weeks' gestation) between 1 March 2020 and 28 February 2021 and were either antenatally exposed, neonatally exposed or unexposed (comparison cohort) to SARS-CoV-2. Nationally, hospitals will identify and approach parents of children eligible for inclusion in the antenatally and neonatally exposed cohorts using information from the UK Obstetric Surveillance System (UKOSS) and British Paediatric Surveillance Unit (BPSU) national surveillance studies and will identify and approach eligible children for the comparison cohort through routine birth records. Parents will be asked to complete questionnaires to assess their child's development at 21-24 months of age. Outcome measures comprise the Ages and Stages Questionnaire, Third Edition (ASQ-3), Ages and Stages Questionnaire Social-Emotional, Second Edition (ASQ-SE-2), Liverpool respiratory symptoms questionnaire and questionnaire items to elicit information about healthcare usage. With parental consent, study data will be linked to routine health and education records for future follow-up. Regression models will compare ASQ-3 and ASQ-SE-2 scores and proportions, frequency of respiratory symptoms and healthcare usage between the exposed and comparison cohorts, adjusting for potential confounders. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was obtained from the London-Westminster Research Ethics Committee. Findings will be disseminated in scientific conference presentations and peer-reviewed publications. ISRCTN REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN99910769.

Design and evaluation of an interactive quality dashboard for national clinical audit data: a realist evaluation

BackgroundNational audits aim to reduce variations in quality by stimulating quality improvement. However, varying provider engagement with audit data means that this is not being realised.AimThe aim of the study was to develop and evaluate a quality dashboard (i.e. QualDash) to support clinical teams’ and managers’ use of national audit data.DesignThe study was a realist evaluation and biography of artefacts study.SettingThe study involved five NHS acute trusts.Methods and resultsIn phase 1, we developed a theory of national audits through interviews. Data use was supported by data access, audit staff skilled to produce data visualisations, data timeliness and quality, and the importance of perceived metrics. Data were mainly used by clinical teams. Organisational-level staff questioned the legitimacy of national audits. In phase 2, QualDash was co-designed and the QualDash theory was developed. QualDash provides interactive customisable visualisations to enable the exploration of relationships between variables. Locating QualDash on site servers gave users control of data upload frequency. In phase 3, we developed an adoption strategy through focus groups. ‘Champions’, awareness-raising through e-bulletins and demonstrations, and quick reference tools were agreed. In phase 4, we tested the QualDash theory using a mixed-methods evaluation. Constraints on use were metric configurations that did not match users’ expectations, affecting champions’ willingness to promote QualDash, and limited computing resources. Easy customisability supported use. The greatest use was where data use was previously constrained. In these contexts, report preparation time was reduced and efforts to improve data quality were supported, although the interrupted time series analysis did not show improved data quality. Twenty-three questionnaires were returned, revealing positive perceptions of ease of use and usefulness. In phase 5, the feasibility of conducting a cluster randomised controlled trial of QualDash was assessed. Interviews were undertaken to understand how QualDash could be revised to support a region-wide Gold Command. Requirements included multiple real-time data sources and functionality to help to identify priorities.ConclusionsAudits seeking to widen engagement may find the following strategies beneficial: involving a range of professional groups in choosing metrics;real-time reporting;presenting ‘headline’ metrics important to organisational-level staff;using routinely collected clinical data to populate data fields;and dashboards that help staff to explore and report audit data. Those designing dashboards may find it beneficial to include the following: ‘at a glance’ visualisation of key metrics;visualisations configured in line with existing visualisations that teams use, with clear labelling;functionality that supports the creation of reports and presentations;the ability to explore relationships between variables and drill down to look at subgroups;and low requirements for computing resources. Organisations introducing a dashboard may find the following strategies beneficial: clinical champion to promote use;testing with real data by audit staff;establishing routines for integrating use into work practices;involving audit staff in adoption activities;and allowing customisation.LimitationsThe COVID-19 pandemic stopped phase 4 data collection, limiting our ability to further test and refine the QualDash theory. Questionnaire results should be treated with caution because of the small, possibly biased, sample. Control sites for the interrupted time series analysis were not possible because of research and development delays. One intervention site did not submit data. Limited uptake meant that assessing the impact on more measures was not appropriate.Future workThe extent to which national audit dashboards are used and the strategies national audits use to encourage uptake, a realist review of the impact of dashboards, and rigorous evaluations of the impact of dashboards and the effectiveness of adoption strategies should be explored.Study registrationThis study is registered as ISRCTN18289782.FundingThis project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research;Vol. 10, No. 12. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Effect of SARS-CoV-2 infection in neonates or in pregnancy on developmental outcomes at 21–24 months (SINEPOST): study protocol for a prospective cohort study

Introduction Exposure to SARS-CoV-2 during pregnancy or in the neonatal period may impact fetal or neonatal brain development either through direct central nervous system infection or indirectly through the adverse effects of viral infection-related inflammation in the mother or newborn infant. This study aims to determine whether there are early neurodevelopmental effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods and analysis We will conduct a prospective national population-based cohort study of children aged 21–24 months who were born at term (≥37 weeks’ gestation) between 1 March 2020 and 28 February 2021 and were either antenatally exposed, neonatally exposed or unexposed (comparison cohort) to SARS-CoV-2. Nationally, hospitals will identify and approach parents of children eligible for inclusion in the antenatally and neonatally exposed cohorts using information from the UK Obstetric Surveillance System (UKOSS) and British Paediatric Surveillance Unit (BPSU) national surveillance studies and will identify and approach eligible children for the comparison cohort through routine birth records. Parents will be asked to complete questionnaires to assess their child’s development at 21–24 months of age. Outcome measures comprise the Ages and Stages Questionnaire, Third Edition (ASQ-3), Ages and Stages Questionnaire Social-Emotional, Second Edition (ASQ-SE-2), Liverpool respiratory symptoms questionnaire and questionnaire items to elicit information about healthcare usage. With parental consent, study data will be linked to routine health and education records for future follow-up. Regression models will compare ASQ-3 and ASQ-SE-2 scores and proportions, frequency of respiratory symptoms and healthcare usage between the exposed and comparison cohorts, adjusting for potential confounders. Ethics and dissemination Ethics approval was obtained from the London-Westminster Research Ethics Committee. Findings will be disseminated in scientific conference presentations and peer-reviewed publications. ISRCTN registration number ISRCTN99910769.

CODE-EHR best practice framework for the use of structured electronic healthcare records in clinical research.

Big data is central to new developments in global clinical science aiming to improve the lives of patients. Technological advances have led to the routine use of structured electronic healthcare records with the potential to address key gaps in clinical evidence. The covid-19 pandemic has demonstrated the potential of big data and related analytics, but also important pitfalls. Verification, validation, and data privacy, as well as the social mandate to undertake research are key challenges. The European Society of Cardiology and the BigData@Heart consortium have brought together a range of international stakeholders, including patient representatives, clinicians, scientists, regulators, journal editors and industry. We propose the CODE-EHR Minimum Standards Framework as a means to improve the design of studies, enhance transparency and develop a roadmap towards more robust and effective utilisation of healthcare data for research purposes.

CODE-EHR best-practice framework for the use of structured electronic health-care records in clinical research.

Big data is important to new developments in global clinical science that aim to improve the lives of patients. Technological advances have led to the regular use of structured electronic health-care records with the potential to address key deficits in clinical evidence that could improve patient care. The COVID-19 pandemic has shown this potential in big data and related analytics but has also revealed important limitations. Data verification, data validation, data privacy, and a mandate from the public to conduct research are important challenges to effective use of routine health-care data. The European Society of Cardiology and the BigData@Heart consortium have brought together a range of international stakeholders, including representation from patients, clinicians, scientists, regulators, journal editors, and industry members. In this Review, we propose the CODE-EHR minimum standards framework to be used by researchers and clinicians to improve the design of studies and enhance transparency of study methods. The CODE-EHR framework aims to develop robust and effective utilisation of health-care data for research purposes.

The Direct and Indirect Effects of COVID-19 on Acute Coronary Syndromes.

The novel SARS-CoV-2 has directly and indirectly impacted patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic correlated with an abrupt decline in hospitalizations with ACS and increased out-of-hospital deaths. Worse outcomes in ACS patients with concomitant COVID-19 have been reported, and acute myocardial injury secondary to SARS-CoV-2 infection is recognized. A rapid adaptation of existing ACS pathways has been required such that overburdened health care systems may manage both a novel contagion and existing illness. As SARS-CoV-2 is now endemic, future research is required to better define the complex interplay of COVID-19 infection and cardiovascular disease.

Aortic stenosis post-COVID-19: a mathematical model on waiting lists and mortality.

OBJECTIVES: To provide estimates for how different treatment pathways for the management of severe aortic stenosis (AS) may affect National Health Service (NHS) England waiting list duration and associated mortality. DESIGN: We constructed a mathematical model of the excess waiting list and found the closed-form analytic solution to that model. From published data, we calculated estimates for how the strategies listed under Interventions may affect the time to clear the backlog of patients waiting for treatment and the associated waiting list mortality. SETTING: The NHS in England. PARTICIPANTS: Estimated patients with AS in England. INTERVENTIONS: (1) Increasing the capacity for the treatment of severe AS, (2) converting proportions of cases from surgery to transcatheter aortic valve implantation and (3) a combination of these two. RESULTS: In a capacitated system, clearing the backlog by returning to pre-COVID-19 capacity is not possible. A conversion rate of 50% would clear the backlog within 666 (533-848) days with 1419 (597-2189) deaths while waiting during this time. A 20% capacity increase would require 535 (434-666) days, with an associated mortality of 1172 (466-1859). A combination of converting 40% cases and increasing capacity by 20% would clear the backlog within a year (343 (281-410) days) with 784 (292-1324) deaths while awaiting treatment. CONCLUSION: A strategy change to the management of severe AS is required to reduce the NHS backlog and waiting list deaths during the post-COVID-19 'recovery' period. However, plausible adaptations will still incur a substantial wait to treatment and many hundreds dying while waiting.

Very early invasive angiography versus standard of care in higher-risk non-ST elevation myocardial infarction: study protocol for the prospective multicentre randomised controlled RAPID N-STEMI trial.

BACKGROUND: There are a paucity of randomised data on the optimal timing of invasive coronary angiography (ICA) in higher-risk patients with non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (N-STEMI). International guideline recommendations for early ICA are primarily based on retrospective subgroup analyses of neutral trials. AIMS: The RAPID N-STEMI trial aims to determine whether very early percutaneous revascularisation improves clinical outcomes as compared with a standard of care strategy in higher-risk N-STEMI patients. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: RAPID N-STEMI is a prospective, multicentre, open-label, randomised-controlled, pragmatic strategy trial. Higher-risk N-STEMI patients, as defined by Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events 2.0 score ≥118, or >90 with at least one additional high-risk feature, were randomised to either: very early ICA±revascularisation or standard of care timing of ICA±revascularisation. The primary outcome is the proportion of participants with at least one of the following events (all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction and hospital admission for heart failure) at 12 months. Key secondary outcomes include major bleeding and stroke. A hypothesis generating cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) substudy will provide mechanistic data on infarct size, myocardial salvage and residual ischaemia post percutaneous coronary intervention. On 7 April 2021, the sponsor discontinued enrolment due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and lower than expected event rates. 425 patients were enrolled, and 61 patients underwent CMR. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The trial has been reviewed and approved by the East of England Cambridge East Research Ethics Committee (18/EE/0222). The study results will be submitted for publication within 6 months of completion. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03707314; Pre-results.

The collateral damage of COVID-19 to cardiovascular services: a meta-analysis.

AIMS: The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on care and outcomes across non-COVID-19 cardiovascular (CV) diseases is unknown. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to quantify the effect and investigate for variation by CV disease, geographic region, country income classification and the time course of the pandemic. METHODS AND RESULTS: From January 2019 to December 2021, Medline and Embase databases were searched for observational studies comparing a pandemic and pre-pandemic period with relation to CV disease hospitalisations, diagnostic and interventional procedures, outpatient consultations, and mortality. Observational data were synthesised by incidence rate ratios (IRR) and risk ratios (RR) for binary outcomes and weighted mean differences for continuous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals. The study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021265930). A total of 158 studies, covering 49 countries and 6 continents, were used for quantitative synthesis. Most studies (80%) reported information for high-income countries (HICs). Across all CV disease and geographies there were fewer hospitalisations, diagnostic and interventional procedures, and outpatient consultations during the pandemic. By meta-regression, in low-middle income countries (LMICs) compared to HICs the decline in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) hospitalisations (RR 0.79, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.66-0.94) and revascularisation (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.62-0.87) was more severe. In LMICs, but not HICs, in-hospital mortality increased for STEMI (RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.10-1.37) and heart failure (RR 1.08, 95% CI 1.04-1.12). The magnitude of decline in hospitalisations for CV diseases did not differ between the first and second wave. CONCLUSIONS: There was substantial global collateral CV damage during the COVID-19 pandemic with disparity in severity by country income classification.

Excess years of life lost to COVID-19 and other causes of death by sex, neighbourhood deprivation, and region in England and Wales during 2020: A registry-based study.

BACKGROUND: Deaths in the first year of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in England and Wales were unevenly distributed socioeconomically and geographically. However, the full scale of inequalities may have been underestimated to date, as most measures of excess mortality do not adequately account for varying age profiles of deaths between social groups. We measured years of life lost (YLL) attributable to the pandemic, directly or indirectly, comparing mortality across geographic and socioeconomic groups. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We used national mortality registers in England and Wales, from 27 December 2014 until 25 December 2020, covering 3,265,937 deaths. YLLs (main outcome) were calculated using 2019 single year sex-specific life tables for England and Wales. Interrupted time-series analyses, with panel time-series models, were used to estimate expected YLL by sex, geographical region, and deprivation quintile between 7 March 2020 and 25 December 2020 by cause: direct deaths (COVID-19 and other respiratory diseases), cardiovascular disease and diabetes, cancer, and other indirect deaths (all other causes). Excess YLL during the pandemic period were calculated by subtracting observed from expected values. Additional analyses focused on excess deaths for region and deprivation strata, by age-group. Between 7 March 2020 and 25 December 2020, there were an estimated 763,550 (95% CI: 696,826 to 830,273) excess YLL in England and Wales, equivalent to a 15% (95% CI: 14 to 16) increase in YLL compared to the equivalent time period in 2019. There was a strong deprivation gradient in all-cause excess YLL, with rates per 100,000 population ranging from 916 (95% CI: 820 to 1,012) for the least deprived quintile to 1,645 (95% CI: 1,472 to 1,819) for the most deprived. The differences in excess YLL between deprivation quintiles were greatest in younger age groups; for all-cause deaths, a mean of 9.1 years per death (95% CI: 8.2 to 10.0) were lost in the least deprived quintile, compared to 10.8 (95% CI: 10.0 to 11.6) in the most deprived; for COVID-19 and other respiratory deaths, a mean of 8.9 years per death (95% CI: 8.7 to 9.1) were lost in the least deprived quintile, compared to 11.2 (95% CI: 11.0 to 11.5) in the most deprived. For all-cause mortality, estimated deaths in the most deprived compared to the most affluent areas were much higher in younger age groups, but similar for those aged 85 or over. There was marked variability in both all-cause and direct excess YLL by region, with the highest rates in the North West. Limitations include the quasi-experimental nature of the research design and the requirement for accurate and timely recording. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we observed strong socioeconomic and geographical health inequalities in YLL, during the first calendar year of the COVID-19 pandemic. These were in line with long-standing existing inequalities in England and Wales, with the most deprived areas reporting the largest numbers in potential YLL.