ABSTRACT
Introduction: Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been associated with an increased risk of adverse cardiovascular events including arteriovenous thrombosis, myocarditis and acute myocardial injury. Relevant literature to date has reported widely varying estimates of mortality, ranging from approximately 2 to 11 times higher odds of mortality in COVID-19-positive STEMI (ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction) patients. Hence, we conducted this meta-analysis to resolve these inconsistencies and assess the impact of COVID-19 infection on mortality and other clinical outcomes in patients presenting with STEMI. Methods: This meta-analysis was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021297458) and performed according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. PubMed and Embase were searched from inception to November 2021 (updated on April 2022) using a search strategy consisting of terms relating to COVID-19, STEMI, and mortality. Results: We identified 435 studies through our initial search. After screening according to our eligibility criteria, a total of 11 studies were included. Compared with the non-COVID-19 STEMI patients, the in-hospital mortality rate was higher in COVID-19-positive STEMI patients. Similarly, the risk of cardiogenic shock was higher in the COVID-19-positive patients. Length of hospital stay was longer in STEMI patients with COVID-19. Conclusions: Our study highlights the necessity for early evaluation of COVID-19 status in all STEMI patients followed by risk stratification, prompt reperfusion and more aggressive management of COVID-19-positive patients. Further research is needed to elucidate the mechanisms behind poorer prognosis in such patients.
ABSTRACT
Background: Previous meta-analyses have focused on investigating the impact of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on outcomes in STEMI patients. We aimed to examine the outcomes and prognosis following ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) among those with COVID-19 compared with those without COVID-19. Methods: PubMed and Embase were searched from inception till November 2021. We included only those studies that compared our primary outcome, in-hospital mortality, between COVID-19-positive and COVID-19-negative cohorts with primarily out-of-hospital STEMI. We conducted a random-effects meta-analysis to investigate the association between COVID-19 infection and mortality as well as other clinical outcomes. Results: A total of 11 observational studies were included in our meta-analysis. Most of the studies were of sufficiently high quality. Our findings show that a diagnosis of COVID-19 in STEMI patients is associated with a large increase in mortality (OR 4.07;95% CI: 2.48-6.69) and poorer clinical outcomes but with no increase in door-to-balloon (D2B) time (MD 9.45 minutes, 95% CI: -1.25 to 20.15 minutes). Conclusions: In this meta-analysis, a diagnosis of COVID-19 was found to greatly increase the risk of mortality. An early assessment of COVID-19 status in STEMI patients is needed followed by urgent management.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Acute pulmonary embolism (PE) remains an important cause of cardiovascular mortality and morbidity in the USA and worldwide. Catheter-based therapies are emerging as a new armamentarium for improving outcomes in these patients. PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review is to familiarize the clinicians with (1) various types of catheter-based modalities available for patients with acute PE, (2) advantages, disadvantages, and appropriate patient selection for the use of these devices, and (3) evidence base and the relevance of such therapies in the COVID-19 pandemic. RECENT FINDINGS: There are four main types of catheter-based therapies in acute PE: (1) standard catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT), (2) ultrasound-assisted CDT, (3) pharmacomechanical CDT, and (4) mechanical thrombectomy without thrombolysis. Ultrasound-assisted thrombolysis is the most widely studied modality in this group; however, evidence base for other catheter-based technologies is rapidly emerging. SUMMARY: Current use of catheter-based therapies is most suitable for patients with intermediate and high-risk acute PE. The adoption of a multidisciplinary approach like the pulmonary embolism response team (PERT) is desirable for appropriate patient selection and possibly/potentially improving patient outcomes. We discuss the current status of these therapies.
ABSTRACT
We present the characteristics and outcomes of the first 2 cases of catheter-directed thrombolysis performed in patients presenting with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19)-related iliocaval thrombosis. (Level of Difficulty: Beginner.).
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Infection with the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 has been associated with a hypercoagulable state. Emerging data from China and Europe have consistently shown an increased incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE). We aimed to identify the VTE incidence and early predictors of VTE at our high-volume tertiary care center. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of 147 patients who had been admitted to Temple University Hospital with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) from April 1, 2020 to April 27, 2020. We first identified the VTE (pulmonary embolism [PE] and deep vein thrombosis [DVT]) incidence in our cohort. The VTE and no-VTE groups were compared by univariable analysis for demographics, comorbidities, laboratory data, and treatment outcomes. Subsequently, multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the early predictors of VTE. RESULTS: The 147 patients (20.9% of all admissions) admitted to a designated COVID-19 unit at Temple University Hospital with a high clinical suspicion of acute VTE had undergone testing for VTE using computed tomography pulmonary angiography and/or extremity venous duplex ultrasonography. The overall incidence of VTE was 17% (25 of 147). Of the 25 patients, 16 had had acute PE, 14 had had acute DVT, and 5 had had both PE and DVT. The need for invasive mechanical ventilation (adjusted odds ratio, 3.19; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-9.55) and the admission D-dimer level ≥1500 ng/mL (adjusted odds ratio, 3.55; 95% confidence interval, 1.29-9.78) were independent markers associated with VTE. The all-cause mortality in the VTE group was greater than that in the non-VTE group (48% vs 22%; P = .007). CONCLUSIONS: Our study represents one of the earliest reported from the United States on the incidence rate of VTE in patients with COVID-19. Patients with a high clinical suspicion and the identified risk factors (invasive mechanical ventilation, admission D-dimer level ≥1500 ng/mL) should be considered for early VTE testing. We did not screen all patients admitted for VTE; therefore, the true incidence of VTE could have been underestimated. Our findings require confirmation in future prospective studies.