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.

Safety and Operational Efficiency of Restructuring and Redeploying a Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Service During the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Oxford Experience.

BACKGROUND: The risk of nosocomial COVID-19 infection for vulnerable aortic stenosis patients and intensive care resource utilization has led to cardiac surgery deferral. Untreated severe symptomatic aortic stenosis has a dismal prognosis. TAVR offers an attractive alternative to surgery as it is not reliant on intensive care resources. We set out to explore the safety and operational efficiency of restructuring a TAVR service and redeploying it to a new non-surgical site during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: The institutional prospective service database was retrospectively interrogated for the first 50 consecutive elective TAVR cases prior to and after our institution's operational adaptations for the COVID-19 pandemic. Our endpoints were VARC-2 defined procedural complications, 30-day mortality or re-admission and service efficiency metrics. RESULTS: The profile of patients undergoing TAVR during the pandemic was similar to patients undergoing TAVR prior to the pandemic with the exception of a lower mean age (79 vs 82 years, p < 0.01) and median EuroScore II (3.1% vs 4.6%, p = 0.01). The service restructuring and redeployment contributed to the pandemic-mandated operational efficiency with a reduction in the distribution of pre-admission hospital visits (3 vs 3 visits, p < 0.001) and the time taken from TAVR clinic to procedure (26 vs 77 days, p < 0.0001) when compared to the pre-COVID-19 service. No statistically significant difference was noted in peri-procedural complications and 30-day outcomes, while post-operative length of stay was significantly reduced (2 vs 3 days, p < 0.0001) when compared to pre-COVID-19 practice. CONCLUSIONS: TAVR service restructuring and redeployment to align with pandemic-mandated healthcare resource rationalization is safe and feasible.