Impact of SARS-CoV-2 positivity on clinical outcome among STEMI patients undergoing mechanical reperfusion: Insights from the ISACS STEMI COVID 19 registry.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: SARS-Cov-2 predisposes patients to thrombotic complications, due to excessive inflammation, endothelial dysfunction, platelet activation, and coagulation/fibrinolysis disturbances. The aim of the present study was to evaluate clinical characteristics and prognostic impact of SARS-CoV-2 positivity among STEMI patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI). METHODS: We selected SARS-CoV-2 positive patients included in the ISACS-STEMI COVID-19, a retrospective multicenter European registry including 6609 STEMI patients treated with PPCI from March 1st until April 30th, in 2019 and 2020. As a reference group, we randomly sampled 5 SARS-Cov-2 negative patients per each SARS-CoV-2 positive patient, individually matched for age, sex, and hospital/geographic area. Study endpoints were in-hospital mortality, definite stent thrombosis, heart failure. RESULTS: Our population is represented by 62 positive SARS-CoV-2 positive patients who were compared with a matched population of 310 STEMI patients. No significant difference was observed in baseline characteristics or the modality of access to the PCI center. In the SARS-CoV-2 positive patients, the culprit lesion was more often located in the RCA (p < 0.001). Despite similar pre and postprocedural TIMI flow, we observed a trend in higher use of GP IIb-IIIa inhibitors and a significantly higher use of thrombectomy in the SARS-CoV-2 positive patients. SARS-CoV-2 positivity was associated with a remarkably higher in hospital mortality (29% vs 5.5%, p < 0.001), definite in-stent thrombosis (8.1% vs 1.6%, p = 0.004) and heart failure (22.6% vs 10.6%, p = 0.001) that was confirmed after adjustment for confounding factors. CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that among STEMI patients, SARS-CoV-2 positivity is associated with larger thrombus burden, a remarkably higher mortality but also higher rates of in-stent thrombosis and heart failure.

Indirect Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Activity and Outcomes of Transcatheter and Surgical Treatment of Aortic Stenosis in England.

[Figure: see text].

International Prospective Registry of Acute Coronary Syndromes in Patients With COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Published data suggest worse outcomes in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients and concurrent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. Mechanisms remain unclear. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to report the demographics, angiographic findings, and in-hospital outcomes of COVID-19 ACS patients and compare these with pre-COVID-19 cohorts. METHODS: From March 1, 2020 to July 31, 2020, data from 55 international centers were entered into a prospective, COVID-ACS Registry. Patients were COVID-19 positive (or had a high index of clinical suspicion) and underwent invasive coronary angiography for suspected ACS. Outcomes were in-hospital major cardiovascular events (all-cause mortality, re-myocardial infarction, heart failure, stroke, unplanned revascularization, or stent thrombosis). Results were compared with national pre-COVID-19 databases (MINAP [Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project] 2019 and BCIS [British Cardiovascular Intervention Society] 2018 to 2019). RESULTS: In 144 ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and 121 non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) patients, symptom-to-admission times were significantly prolonged (COVID-STEMI vs. BCIS: median 339.0 min vs. 173.0 min; p < 0.001; COVID NSTE-ACS vs. MINAP: 417.0 min vs. 295.0 min; p = 0.012). Mortality in COVID-ACS patients was significantly higher than BCIS/MINAP control subjects in both subgroups (COVID-STEMI: 22.9% vs. 5.7%; p < 0.001; COVID NSTE-ACS: 6.6% vs. 1.2%; p < 0.001), which remained following multivariate propensity analysis adjusting for comorbidities (STEMI subgroup odds ratio: 3.33 [95% confidence interval: 2.04 to 5.42]). Cardiogenic shock occurred in 20.1% of COVID-STEMI patients versus 8.7% of BCIS patients (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this multicenter international registry, COVID-19-positive ACS patients presented later and had increased in-hospital mortality compared with a pre-COVID-19 ACS population. Excessive rates of and mortality from cardiogenic shock were major contributors to the worse outcomes in COVID-19 positive STEMI patients.

Outcomes following PCI in CABG candidates during the COVID-19 pandemic: The prospective multicentre UK-ReVasc registry.

OBJECTIVES: To describe outcomes following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients who would usually have undergone coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). BACKGROUND: In the United Kingdom, cardiac surgery for coronary artery disease (CAD) was dramatically reduced during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Many patients with "surgical disease" instead underwent PCI. METHODS: Between 1 March 2020 and 31 July 2020, 215 patients with recognized "surgical" CAD who underwent PCI were enrolled in the prospective UK-ReVasc Registry (ReVR). 30-day major cardiovascular event outcomes were collected. Findings in ReVR patients were directly compared to reference PCI and isolated CABG pre-COVID-19 data from British Cardiovascular Intervention Society (BCIS) and National Cardiac Audit Programme (NCAP) databases. RESULTS: ReVR patients had higher incidence of diabetes (34.4% vs 26.4%, P = .008), multi-vessel disease with left main stem disease (51.4% vs 3.0%, P < .001) and left anterior descending artery involvement (94.8% vs 67.2%, P < .001) compared to BCIS data. SYNTAX Score in ReVR was high (mean 28.0). Increased use of transradial access (93.3% vs 88.6%, P = .03), intracoronary imaging (43.6% vs 14.4%, P < .001) and calcium modification (23.6% vs 3.5%, P < .001) was observed. No difference in in-hospital mortality was demonstrated compared to PCI and CABG data (ReVR 1.4% vs BCIS 0.7%, P = .19; vs NCAP 1.0%, P = .48). Inpatient stay was half compared to CABG (3.0 vs 6.0 days). Low-event rates in ReVR were maintained to 30-day follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: PCI undertaken using contemporary techniques produces excellent short-term results in patients who would be otherwise CABG candidates. Longer-term follow-up is essential to determine whether these outcomes are maintained over time.

Cardiac operations and interventions during the COVID-19 pandemic: a nationwide perspective.

AIMS: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a decline in hospitalizations for non-COVID-19-related conditions. We explored the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cardiac operations and interventions undertaken in England. METHODS AND RESULTS: An administrative database covering hospital activity for England, the Health Episodes Statistics, was used to assess a total of 286 697 hospitalizations for cardiac operations and interventions, as well as 227 257 hospitalizations for myocardial infarction (MI) and 453 799 for heart failure (HF) from 7 January 2019 to 26 July 2020. Over the 3 months of 'lockdown', total numbers and mean reductions in weekly rates [n (-%)], compared with the same time period in 2019, were: coronary artery bypass grafting [-2507 (-64%)]; percutaneous coronary intervention [-5245 (-28%)]; surgical [-1324 (-41%)] and transcatheter [-284 (-21%)] aortic valve replacement; mitral valve replacement; implantation of pacemakers [-6450 (-44%)], cardiac resynchronization therapy with [-356 (-42%)] or without [-491 (-46%)] defibrillation devices, and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators [-501 (-45%)]; atrial fibrillation ablation [-1902 (-83%)], and other ablations [-1712 (-64%)] (all P < 0.001). Over this period, there were 21 038 fewer procedures than in the reference period in 2019 (P < 0.001). These changes paralleled reductions in hospitalizations for MI [-10 794 (-27%)] and HF [-63 058 (-28%)] (both P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to substantial reductions in the number of cardiac operations and interventions undertaken. An alternative strategy for healthcare delivery to patients with cardiac conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic is urgently needed.

'Valve for Life': tackling the deficit in transcatheter treatment of heart valve disease in the UK.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a proven treatment for life-threatening aortic valve disease, predominantly severe aortic stenosis. However, even among developed nations, access to TAVI is not uniform. The Valve for Life initiative was launched by the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions in 2015 with the objective of improving access to transcatheter valve interventions across Europe. The UK has been identified as a country with low penetration of these procedures and has been selected as the fourth nation to be included in the initiative. Specifically, the number of TAVI procedures carried out in the UK is significantly lower than almost all other European nations. Furthermore, there is substantial geographical inequity in access to TAVI within the UK. As a consequence of this underprovision, waiting times for TAVI are long, and mortality among those waiting intervention is significant. This article reviews these issues, reports new data on access to TAVI in the UK and presents the proposals of the UK Valve for Life team to address the current problems in association with the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society.

In-Hospital and 30-Day Mortality After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in England in the Pre-COVID and COVID Eras.

BACKGROUND: Public reporting of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) outcomes is a performance metric and a requirement in many healthcare systems. There are inconsistent data on the causes of death after PCI, and the proportion of these deaths that are attributable to cardiac causes. METHODS: All patients undergoing PCI in England between January 1, 2017 and May 10, 2020 (n = 273,141) were retrospectively analyzed according to their outcome from the date of PCI: no death, in-hospital death, postdischarge death, and total 30-day death. The present study examined short-term primary causes of death after PCI in a national cohort before and during COVID-19. RESULTS: The overall rates of in-hospital and 30-day death were 1.9% and 2.8%, respectively. The rate of 30-day death declined between 2017 (2.9%) and February 2020 (2.5%), mainly due to lower in-hospital death (2.1% vs 1.5%), before rising again from March 1, 2020 (3.2%) due to higher rates of postdischarge mortality. Only 59.6% of 30-day deaths were due to cardiac causes, with the most common causes being acute coronary syndrome, cardiogenic shock, and heart failure, and this persisted throughout the study period. In the 30-day death group, 10.4% after March 1, 2020 were due to confirmed COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: In this nationwide study, we show that 40% of 30-day deaths are due to non-cardiac causes. Non-cardiac deaths have increased even more from the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, with 1 in 10 deaths from March 2020 being COVID-19 related. These findings raise a question of whether public reporting of PCI outcomes should be cause specific.

Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Mechanical Reperfusion for Patients With STEMI.

BACKGROUND: The fear of contagion during the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic may have potentially refrained patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) from accessing the emergency system, with subsequent impact on mortality. OBJECTIVES: The ISACS-STEMI COVID-19 registry aims to estimate the true impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the treatment and outcome of patients with STEMI treated by primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI), with identification of "at-risk" patient cohorts for failure to present or delays to treatment. METHODS: This retrospective registry was performed in European high-volume PPCI centers and assessed patients with STEMI treated with PPPCI in March/April 2019 and 2020. Main outcomes are the incidences of PPCI, delayed treatment, and in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: A total of 6,609 patients underwent PPCI in 77 centers, located in 18 countries. In 2020, during the pandemic, there was a significant reduction in PPCI as compared with 2019 (incidence rate ratio: 0.811; 95% confidence interval: 0.78 to 0.84; p < 0.0001). The heterogeneity among centers was not related to the incidence of death due to COVID-19. A significant interaction was observed for patients with arterial hypertension, who were less frequently admitted in 2020 than in 2019. Furthermore, the pandemic was associated with a significant increase in door-to-balloon and total ischemia times, which may have contributed to the higher mortality during the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic had significant impact on the treatment of patients with STEMI, with a 19% reduction in PPCI procedures, especially among patients suffering from hypertension, and a longer delay to treatment, which may have contributed to the increased mortality during the pandemic. (Primary Angioplasty for STEMI During COVID-19 Pandemic [ISACS-STEMI COVID-19] Registry; NCT04412655).

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in England: Insights From the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society PCI Database Cohort.

BACKGROUND: The objective of the study was to evaluate changes in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) practice in England by analyzing procedural numbers, changes in the clinical presentation, and characteristics of patients and their clinical outcomes during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of all patients who underwent PCI in England between January 2017 and April 2020 in the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society database. RESULTS: Forty-four hospitals reported PCI procedures for 126 491 patients. There were ≈700 procedures performed each week before the lockdown. After the March 23, 2020 lockdown (11th/12th week in 2020), there was a 49% fall in the number of PCI procedures after the 12th week in 2020. The decrease was greatest in PCI procedures performed for stable angina (66%), followed by non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (45%), and ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (33%). Patients after the lockdown were younger (64.5 versus 65.5 years, P<0.001) and less likely to have diabetes (20.4% versus 24.6%, P<0.001), hypertension (52.0% versus 56.8%, P=0.001), previous myocardial infarction (23.5% versus 26.7%, P=0.008), previous PCI (24.3% versus 28.3%, P=0.001), or previous coronary artery bypass graft (4.6% versus 7.2%, P<0.001) compared with before the lockdown. CONCLUSIONS: The lockdown in England has resulted in a significant decline in PCI procedures. Fewer patients underwent PCI for stable angina. This enabled greater capacity for urgent and emergency cases, and a reduced length of stay was seen for such patients. Significant changes in the characteristics of patients towards a lower risk phenotype were observed, particularly for non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, reflecting a more conservative approach to this cohort.

Impact of COVID-19 on percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND: The objective of the study was to identify any changes in primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in England by analysing procedural numbers, clinical characteristics and patient outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent PCI in England between January 2017 and April 2020 in the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society-National Institute of Cardiovascular Outcomes Research database. Analysis was restricted to 44 hospitals that reported contemporaneous activity on PCI. Only patients with primary PCI for STEMI were included in the analysis. RESULTS: A total of 34 127 patients with STEMI (primary PCI 33 938, facilitated PCI 108, rescue PCI 81) were included in the study. There was a decline in the number of procedures by 43% (n=497) in April 2020 compared with the average monthly procedures between 2017 and 2019 (n=865). For all patients, the median time from symptom to hospital showed increased after the lockdown (150 (99-270) vs 135 (89-250) min, p=0.004) and a longer door-to-balloon time after the lockdown (48 (21-112) vs 37 (16-94) min, p<0.001). The in-hospital mortality rate was 4.8% before the lockdown and 3.5% after the lockdown (p=0.12). Following adjustment for baseline characteristics, no differences were observed for in-hospital death (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.68, p=0.67) and major adverse cardiovascular events (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.32, p=0.28). CONCLUSIONS: Following the lockdown in England, we observed a decline in primary PCI procedures for STEMI and increases in overall symptom-to-hospital and door-to-balloon time for patients with STEMI. Restructuring health services during COVID-19 has not adversely influenced in-hospital outcomes.