Investigating the Association Between Telemedicine Use and Timely Follow-Up Care After Acute Cardiovascular Hospital Encounters

Background Telemedicine use increased dramatically during the COVID-19 pandemic;however, questions remain as to how telemedicine use impacts care. Objectives The purpose of this study was to examine the association of increased telemedicine use on rates of timely follow-up and unplanned readmission after acute cardiovascular hospital encounters. Methods We examined hospital encounters for acute coronary syndrome, arrhythmia disorders, heart failure (HF), and valvular heart disease from a large U.S., multisite, integrated academic health system among patients with established cardiovascular care within the system. We evaluated 14-day postdischarge follow-up and 30-day all-cause unplanned readmission rates for encounters from the pandemic "steady state” period from May 24, 2020 through December 31, 2020, when telemedicine use was high and compared them to those of encounters from the week-matched period in 2019 (May 26, 2019, through December 31, 2019), adjusting for patient and encounter characteristics. Results The study population included 6,026 hospital encounters. In the pandemic steady-state period, 40% of follow-ups after these encounters were conducted via telemedicine vs 0% during the week-matched period in 2019. Overall, 14-day follow-up rates increased from 41.7% to 44.9% (adjusted difference: +2.0 percentage points [pp], 95% CI: −1.1 to +5.1 pp, P = 0.20). HF encounters experienced the largest improvement from 50.1% to 55.5% (adjusted difference: +6.5 pp, 95% CI: +0.5 to +12.4 pp, P = 0.03). Overall 30-day all-cause unplanned readmission rates fell slightly, from 18.3% to 16.9% (adjusted difference −1.6 pp;95% CI: −4.0 to +0.8 pp, P = 0.20). Conclusions Increased telemedicine use during the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with earlier follow-ups, particularly after HF encounters. Readmission rates did not increase, suggesting that the shift to telemedicine did not compromise care quality. Central Illustration

Epidemiology and Management of ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction in Patients With COVID-19: A Report From the American Heart Association COVID-19 Cardiovascular Disease Registry.

Background Early reports from the COVID-19 pandemic identified coronary thrombosis leading to ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) as a complication of COVID-19 infection. However, the epidemiology of STEMI in patients with COVID-19 is not well characterized. We sought to determine the incidence, diagnostic and therapeutic approaches, and outcomes in STEMI patients hospitalized for COVID-19. Methods and Results Patients with data on presentation ECG and in-hospital myocardial infarction were identified from January 14, 2020 to November 30, 2020, from 105 sites participating in the American Heart Association COVID-19 Cardiovascular Disease Registry. Patient characteristics, resource use, and clinical outcomes were summarized and compared based on the presence or absence of STEMI. Among 15 621 COVID-19 hospitalizations, 54 (0.35%) patients experienced in-hospital STEMI. Among patients with STEMI, the majority (n=40, 74%) underwent transthoracic echocardiography, but only half (n=27, 50%) underwent coronary angiography. Half of all patients with COVID-19 and STEMI (n=27, 50%) did not undergo any form of primary reperfusion therapy. Rates of all-cause shock (47% versus 14%), cardiac arrest (22% versus 4.8%), new heart failure (17% versus 1.4%), and need for new renal replacement therapy (11% versus 4.3%) were multifold higher in patients with STEMI compared with those without STEMI (P<0.050 for all). Rates of in-hospital death were 41% in patients with STEMI, compared with 16% in those without STEMI (P<0.001). Conclusions STEMI in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 is rare but associated with poor in-hospital outcomes. Rates of coronary angiography and primary reperfusion were low in this population of patients with STEMI and COVID-19. Adaptations of systems of care to ensure timely contemporary treatment for this population are needed.

Epidemiology of Acute Heart Failure in Critically Ill Patients With COVID-19: An Analysis From the Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network.

BACKGROUND: Acute heart failure (HF) is an important complication of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and has been hypothesized to relate to inflammatory activation. METHODS: We evaluated consecutive intensive care unit (ICU) admissions for COVID-19 across 6 centers in the Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network, identifying patients with vs without acute HF. Acute HF was subclassified as de novo vs acute-on-chronic, based on the absence or presence of prior HF. Clinical features, biomarker profiles and outcomes were compared. RESULTS: Of 901 admissions to an ICU due to COVID-19, 80 (8.9%) had acute HF, including 18 (2.0%) with classic cardiogenic shock (CS) and 37 (4.1%) with vasodilatory CS. The majority (n = 45) were de novo HF presentations. Compared to patients without acute HF, those with acute HF had higher cardiac troponin and natriuretic peptide levels and similar inflammatory biomarkers; patients with de novo HF had the highest cardiac troponin levels. Notably, among patients critically ill with COVID-19, illness severity (median Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, 8 [IQR, 5-10] vs 6 [4-9]; P = 0.025) and mortality rates (43.8% vs 32.4%; P = 0.040) were modestly higher in patients with vs those without acute HF. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients critically ill with COVID-19, acute HF is distinguished more by biomarkers of myocardial injury and hemodynamic stress than by biomarkers of inflammation.

Relationship Between Myocardial Injury During Index Hospitalization for SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Longer-Term Outcomes.

Background Myocardial injury in patients with COVID-19 is associated with increased mortality during index hospitalization; however, the relationship to long-term sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 is unknown. This study assessed the relationship between myocardial injury (high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T level) during index hospitalization for COVID-19 and longer-term outcomes. Methods and Results This is a prospective cohort of patients who were hospitalized at a single center between March and May 2020 with SARS-CoV-2. Cardiac biomarkers were systematically collected. Outcomes were adjudicated and stratified on the basis of myocardial injury. The study cohort includes 483 patients who had high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T data during their index hospitalization. During index hospitalization, 91 (18.8%) died, 70 (14.4%) had thrombotic complications, and 126 (25.6%) had cardiovascular complications. By 12 months, 107 (22.2%) died. During index hospitalization, 301 (62.3%) had cardiac injury (high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T≧14 ng/L); these patients had 28.6%, 32.2%, and 33.2% mortality during index hospitalization, at 6 months, and at 12 months, respectively, compared with 4.1%, 4.9%, and 4.9% mortality for those with low-level positive troponin and 0%, 0%, and 0% for those with undetectable troponin. Of 392 (81.2%) patients who survived the index hospitalization, 94 (24%) had at least 1 readmission within 12 months, of whom 61 (65%) had myocardial injury during the index hospitalization. Of 377 (96%) patients who were alive and had follow-up after the index hospitalization, 211 (56%) patients had a documented, detailed clinical assessment at 6 months. A total of 78 of 211 (37.0%) had ongoing COVID-19-related symptoms; 34 of 211 (16.1%) had neurocognitive decline, 8 of 211 (3.8%) had increased supplemental oxygen requirements, and 42 of 211 (19.9%) had worsening functional status. Conclusions Myocardial injury during index hospitalization for COVID-19 was associated with increased mortality and may predict who are more likely to have postacute sequelae of COVID-19. Among patients who survived their index hospitalization, the incremental mortality through 12 months was low, even among troponin-positive patients.

Characteristics of clinical trials evaluating cardiovascular therapies for Coronavirus Disease 2019 Registered on ClinicalTrials.gov: a cross sectional analysis.

Morbidity and mortality associated with COVID-19 has increased exponentially, and patients with cardiovascular (CV) disease are at risk for poor outcomes. Several lines of evidence suggest a potential role for CV therapies in COVID-19 treatment. Characteristics of clinical trials of CV therapies related to COVID-19 registered on ClinicalTrials.gov have not been described. METHODS: ClinicalTrials.gov was queried on August 7, 2020 for COVID-19 related trials. Studies evaluating established CV drugs, other fibrinolytics (defibrotide), and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation were included. Studies evaluating anti-microbial, convalescent plasma, non-colchicine anti-inflammatory, and other therapies were excluded. Trial characteristics were tabulated from study-specific entries. RESULTS: A total of 2,935 studies related to COVID-19 were registered as of August 7, 2020. Of these, 1,645 were interventional studies, and the final analytic cohort consisted of 114 studies evaluating 10 CV therapeutic categories. Antithrombotics (32.5%; n = 37) were most commonly evaluated, followed by pulmonary vasodilators (14.0%; n = 16), renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system-related therapies (12.3%; n = 14), and colchicine (8.8%; n = 10). Trials evaluating multiple CV therapy categories and CV therapies in combination with non-CV therapies encompassed 4.4% (n = 5) and 9.6% (n = 11) of studies, respectively. Most studies were designed for randomized allocation (87.7%; n = 100), enrollment of less than 1000 participants (86.8%; n = 99), single site implementation (55.3%; n = 63), and had a primary outcome of mortality or a composite including mortality (56.1%; n = 64). Most study populations consisted of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 (81.6%; n = 93). At the time of database query, 28.9% (n = 33) of studies were not yet recruiting and the majority were estimated to be completed after December 2020 (67.8%; n = 78). Most lead sponsors were located in North America (43.9%; n = 50) or Europe (36.0%; n = 41). CONCLUSIONS: A minority (7%) of clinical trials related to COVID-19 registered on ClinicalTrials.gov plan to evaluate CV therapies. Of CV therapy studies, most were planned to be single center, enroll less than 1000 inpatients, sponsored by European or North American academic institutions, and estimated to complete after December 2020. Collectively, these findings underscore the need for a network of sites with a platform protocol for rapid evaluation of multiple therapies and generalizability to inform clinical care and health policy for COVID-19 moving forward.

Fewer Hospitalizations for Acute Cardiovascular Conditions During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Although patients with cardiovascular disease face excess risks of severe illness with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), there may be indirect consequences of the pandemic on this high-risk patient segment. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to examine longitudinal trends in hospitalizations for acute cardiovascular conditions across a tertiary care health system. METHODS: Acute cardiovascular hospitalizations were tracked between January 1, 2019, and March 31, 2020. Daily hospitalization rates were estimated using negative binomial models. Temporal trends in hospitalization rates were compared across the first 3 months of 2020, with the first 3 months of 2019 as a reference. RESULTS: From January 1, 2019, to March 31, 2020, 6,083 patients experienced 7,187 hospitalizations for primary acute cardiovascular reasons. There were 43.4% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 27.4% to 56.0%) fewer estimated daily hospitalizations in March 2020 compared with March 2019 (p < 0.001). The daily rate of hospitalizations did not change throughout 2019 (-0.01% per day [95% CI: -0.04% to +0.02%]; p = 0.50), January 2020 (-0.5% per day [95% CI: -1.6% to +0.5%]; p = 0.31), or February 2020 (+0.7% per day [95% CI: -0.6% to +2.0%]; p = 0.27). There was significant daily decline in hospitalizations in March 2020 (-5.9% per day [95% CI: -7.6% to -4.3%]; p < 0.001). Length of stay was shorter (4.8 days [25th to 75th percentiles: 2.4 to 8.3 days] vs. 6.0 days [25th to 75th percentiles: 3.1 to 9.6 days]; p = 0.003) and in-hospital mortality was not significantly different (6.2% vs. 4.4%; p = 0.30) in March 2020 compared with March 2019. CONCLUSIONS: During the first phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a marked decline in acute cardiovascular hospitalizations, and patients who were admitted had shorter lengths of stay. These data substantiate concerns that acute care of cardiovascular conditions may be delayed, deferred, or abbreviated during the COVID-19 pandemic.