Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction.

AIM: The coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak in 2019 has negatively impacted the care of patients with other life-threatening diseases, including acute myocardial infarction (AMI). However, there is little published information concerning the depth of the impact on the clinical management and outcome following AMI. METHODS: We enrolled patients with AMI who received urgent primary percutaneous coronary intervention at the Beijing Tiantan Hospital (Beijing, China) between December 1, 2019 and April 10, 2020. Patients were divided into 2 cohorts, the pre-COVID-19 group (from December 1, 2019 to January 31, 2020) and during-COVID-19 group (from February 1, 2020 to April 10, 2020) for analysis. The door-to-balloon (D to B) time, total hospitalization stay (days) and coronary care unit (CCU) hospitalization days were calculated. New York Heart Association heart functional class (NYHA class), re-hospitalization and death ratio in patients were assessed between the two cohorts. RESULTS: A total of 148 AMI patients were enrolled in this study comprising 53 patients pre-COVID-19 group and 95 patients during-COVID-19 group. Patients with AMI during-COVID-19 group had longer symptom onset to hospital time (4.5 [2.0-9.3] vs 3.0 [2.0-5.0] hours, p = 0.013) and D to B time (96 [74-119] vs 67 [52-81] minutes, p <0.001); the D to B time shortened during the study period. The two cohorts did not have significantly different number of hospitalization days, re-hospitalization rates, peak cTnI, BNP or death rates. For the one-year follow-up, the patients in the during-COVID-19 group were classified as NYHA class III-IV more frequently (9 [9.7%] vs 0 [0%], p=0.004). CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic significantly affected one measure of critical care of patients with AMI, NYHA classification, which may have resulted in increased medical expenses.

Impact of the 2019 Novel Coronavirus Disease Pandemic on the Performance of a Cardiovascular Department in a Non-epidemic Center in Beijing, China.

Background: Knowledge of the impact of the 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic on the performance of a cardiovascular department in a medical referral hub center from a non-epidemic area of China is limited. Method: The data on the total number of non-emergency medical cares (including the number of out-patient clinic attendances, the number of patients who were hospitalized in non-intensive care wards, and patients who underwent elective cardiac intervention procedures) and emergency medical cares [including the number of emergency department (ED attendances) and chest pain center (CPC attendances), as well as the number of patients who were hospitalized in coronary care unit (CCU) and the number of patients who underwent emergency cardiac intervention procedures] before and during the pandemic (time before the pandemic: 20th January 2019 to 31st March 2019 and time during the pandemic: 20th January 2020 to 31st March 2020) in the Department of Cardiology and Macrovascular Disease, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University were collected and compared. Results: Both the non-emergency medical and emergency medical cares were affected by the pandemic. The total number of out-patient clinic attendance decreased by 44.8% and the total number of patients who were hospitalized in non-intensive care wards decreased by 56.4%. Pearson correlation analysis showed that the number of out-patient clinic attendance per day was not associated with the number of new confirmed COVID-19 cases and the cumulative number of confirmed COVID-19 patients in Beijing (r = -0.080, p = 0.506 and r = -0.071, p = 0.552, respectively). The total number of patients who underwent non-emergency cardiac intervention procedures decreased during the pandemic, although there were no statistically significant differences except for patent foramen ovale (PFO) occlusion (1.7 ± 2.9 vs. 8.3 ± 2.3, p = 0.035). As for the emergency medical cares, the ED attendances decreased by 22.4%, the total number of CPC attendances increased by 10.3%, and the number of patients who were hospitalized in CCU increased by 8.9%: these differences were not statistically significant. During the pandemic, the proportion of hospitalized patients with ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) significantly increased (19.0 vs. 8.7%, p < 0.001; 28.8 vs. 18.0%, p < 0.001, respectively); also, the number of primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) increased by 10.3%. There was no significant difference between patients before and during the pandemic regarding the age, gender, baseline and discharge medication therapy, as well as length of stay and in-hospital mortality. Conclusions: Our preliminary results demonstrate that both the non-emergency and emergency medical cares were affected by the COVID-19 pandemic even in a referral medical center with low cross-infection risk. The number of the out-patient clinic attendances not associated with the number of confirmed COVID-19 cases could be due to different factors, such as the local government contamination measures. The proportion of hospitalized patients with acute myocardial infarction increased in our center during the pandemic since other hospitals stopped performing primary angioplasty. A hub-and-spoke model could be effective in limiting the collateral damage for patients affected by cardiovascular diseases when the medical system is stressed by disasters, such as COVID-19 pandemic.

Fibrinolysis Therapy Combined with Deferred PCI versus Primary Angioplasty for STEMI Patients During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Preliminary Results from a Single Center.

INTRODUCTION: The efficacy of fibrinolysis therapy with deferred percutaneous coronary angioplasty (FPCI) versus primary angioplasty (PPCI) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is unclear when medical quarantine is needed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Acute ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients underwent PPCI after finishing the screening protocol from January 23, 2020 to June 10, 2020 while FPCI was applied when COVID-19-confirmed cases reoccurred in Beijing near our hospital from June 11, 2020 to July 20, 2020. The door-to-balloon time (DTB) or door-to-needle time (DTN) as well as in-hospital adverse clinical outcomes were compared between the two groups. A propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis was performed to diminish the potential influence of confounding factors on the clinical outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 126 STEMI patients underwent PPCI after finishing the screening protocol and 17 patients received FPCI before PSM. Patients who received FPCI were younger than patients who underwent PPCI (50.8±14.0 versus 64.1±14.2 years, p=0.001), and chronic kidney disease (CKD) was less common in FPCI patients than in patients who underwent PPCI (0% versus 24.6%, p=0.024). The DTN was significantly shorter than DTB (25.8±4.2 versus 61.1±10.7, p=0.000) before PSM. The DTN was significantly shorter than DTB (26.9±4.2 versus 64.9±23.6, p=0.000); however, the incidence rate of in-hospital ischemia and bleeding adverse clinical outcomes were comparable between the two groups after PSM. CONCLUSION: Fibrinolysis therapy combined with deferred PCI can reduce the ischemia time and has a similar in-hospital adverse clinical outcome rate compared with patients who underwent primary PCI during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Myocardial injury in severe COVID-19: Identification and management.

The World Health Organization declared the 2019 coronavirus (COVID-19) a global pandemic on March 12, 2020. However, inadequate attention seems to have been paid to the heart when managing COVID-19 in terms of detection, monitoring and treatment. We are of the opinion that these severe patients may have had myocardial injury or acute myocarditis. Signs that supports this opinion is the extremely high myocardial injury markers in severe patients, cardiac arrhythmia and suffer progressive heart failure or unexpected cardiac arrest in recent studies. Some suggestions involved of treatment need to be made. The use of an intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) plus extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) should be placed earlier if the pneumonia progresses rapidly, the ejection fraction decreases or there is heart failure. Besides, blood purification treatment including continuous kidney substitution treatment (CRRT) is recommended to clear inflammatory factors and block cytokine storm. In addition, the early usage of glucocorticoid and human immunoglobulin has been found to be preferable when acute myocarditis is accompanied by unstable hemodynamics.

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes in Patients with ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction with Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and the Use of a Telemedicine App Before and After the COVID-19 Pandemic at a Center in Beijing, China, from August 2019 to March 2020.

BACKGROUND The efficacy of telemedicine in reducing delay times and short-term adverse clinical outcomes in patients with ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is unclear. This study compared outcomes in patients with STEMI who had percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and the use of a telemedicine app from August 2019 to March 2020 at a single center in Beijing, China. MATERIAL AND METHODS A total of 243 patients with STEMI who underwent PCI were consecutively enrolled and divided into 2 groups according to the date, before or after the pandemic. The 2 groups were further divided into patients who used the app for consulting and those who did not. RESULTS The time from symptom onset to calling an ambulance (SCT), door to balloon time (DTB), and total ischemia time (TIT) were significantly prolonged in patients after the pandemic. Patients who used the app had shorter SCT, DTB, and TIT before and after the pandemic compared to those who did not. Adverse clinical outcomes were significantly higher after compared with before the pandemic, despite the incidence rate of stroke, any revascularization, and stent thrombosis. However, there was no significant difference in short-term adverse clinical outcomes between patients who used the app and those who did not before and after the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS Telemedicine reduced the delay time of STEMI patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. The difference in short-term adverse clinical outcomes was not statistically significant between patients who used the app and those who did not.