ABSTRACT
Aim To explore the impact of coronavirus-2019 disease (COVID-19) pandemic on emergency reper-fusion characteristics in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) from non-epicenter. Methods This was a retrospective study involved STEMI patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI), who admitted to chest pain center in our hospital during the pandemic ( from January 23 to March 29 in 2020) and the same period in 2019, excluding the patients with COVID-19. Clinical characteristics and reperfusion parameters were compared between the two groups. Results A total of 64 STEMI patients undergoing PPCI were enrolled in our study, including 13 patients during the pandemic and 51 patients during the same period in 2019. No differences occurred in admission signs, GRACE scores, arrival periods, transferred patterns,the period from door to troponin,and the period from first medical contact to dual antiplatelet between the two groups ( P>0. 05). As compared with 2019, STEMI patients undergoing PPCI had an apparent reduction. Meanwhile, significant delays appeared in reperfusion parameters, in-cluding the period from symptom onset to first medical contact (10 h vs. 3. 0 h, P<0. 001), the period from first medical contact to electrocardiogram (6 min vs. 3 min, P<0. 001), the period from door to troponin (15 min vs. 12 min, P = 0. 048), the period from door to device (76 min vs. 62 min, P = 0. 017), the period from telephone to catheter activated (15 min vs. 5 min, P<0. 001) and the period from catheter arrival to device (52 min vs. 41 min, P = 0. 033). Conclusion Even in non-epicenter, the COVID-19 outbreak still delayed mechanical reperfusion significantly. © 2022, Editorial Office of Chinese Journal of Arteriosclerosis. All rights reserved.
ABSTRACT
Sustained ventricular arrhythmias that occur early post-myocardial infarction (MI) are generally considered epiphenomena of the MI and are not consistently associated with long-term prognosis. The lack of association with long-term prognosis is more clearly established for early ventricular fibrillation (VF) and polymorphic ventricular tachycardia (PVT). Sustained monomorphic ventricular tachycardia (SMVT), even when it occurs early, however, may reflect a permanent arrhythmic substrate1. Patients with COVID-19 have a high risk of thromboembolic events, and the virus has also been shown to have extensive effects on the cardiovascular system2,3,4. A 62-year-old woman, recently hospitalized for COVID-19 pneumonia, was brought to the emergency department with pulseless SMVT having been successfully resuscitated in the prehospital setting. The patient has a history of an old MI treated with thrombolysis and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) that was complicated with early SMVT, but with preserved left ventricular function and without heart failure. The patient underwent implantation of a cardioverter defibrillator (ICD). During the hospitalization, she developed dyspnea and was diagnosed with minor pulmonary embolism. It may be appropriate to consider early SMVT as a predictor of adverse late outcomes that would necessitate rigorous follow-up and maybe an early invasive primary prevention strategy. This case also reflects the possibility of long-term cardiac involvement and increased thromboembolic risk in patients recovering from COVID-19. © 2022 Maria Zamfirescu et al., published by Sciendo.
ABSTRACT
The aim of the study is to describe a case of COVID-19 and myocardial infarction in an elderly patient. Material and methods. The analysis of medical documentation (outpatient card of the patient, medical history, postmortem report) was carried out. Studied macro- and micropreparations (staining with hematoxylin and eosin). Results. A 67-year-old patient, from 23.04.2020 to 26.04.2020, was hospitalized with a diagnosis of suspected coronavirus infection (COVID-19). On the background of the treatment, the patient's biological death occurred (26.04.2020). The sectional study revealed signs of bilateral total hemorrhagic pneumonia. The signs of acute transmural myocardial infarction of the anterior wall of the left ventricle were determined. Posthumously, SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected in the lung tissue by nucleic acid amplification. In the described clinical case, a patient with concomitant cardiovascular diseases, such as arterial hypertension, coronary heart disease, developed complications against the background of COVID-19: hemorrhagic pneumonia and myocardial infarction with a fatal outcome.Copyright © Infectious Diseases: News, Opinions, Training.
ABSTRACT
BackgroundConsideration is needed when using Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors to treat RA in pts aged ≥65 years or those with cardiovascular (CV) risk factors. The JAK1 preferential inhibitor FIL was generally well tolerated in clinical trials[1];safety has not been determined in a real-world setting.ObjectivesTo report baseline characteristics and up to 6-month safety data from the first 480 pts treated with FIL in the FILOSOPHY study (NCT04871919), and in two mutually exclusive subgroups based on age and CV risk.MethodsFILOSOPHY is an ongoing, phase 4, non-interventional, European study of pts with RA who have been prescribed FIL for the first time and in accordance with the product label in daily practice. Baseline characteristics and the incidence of select adverse events (AEs) are assessed in pts aged ≥65 years and/or with ≥1 CV risk factor (Table 1), and in those aged <65 years with no CV risk factors.ResultsAs of the end of June 2022, 480 pts had been treated: 441 received FIL 200 mg and 39 received FIL 100 mg. Of the 480 pts, 148 (30.8%) were aged ≥65 years;332 (69.2%) were aged <65 years. In total, 86 (17.9%) were former smokers, 81 (16.9%) were current smokers and 203 (42.3%) were non-smokers (data were missing for 110 pts [22.9%]). In addition to smoking, the most frequent CV risk factors included a history of hypertension (32.3%), a history of dyslipidemia (10.2%) and a family history of myocardial infarction (8.5%;Table 1).23 pts (4.8%) discontinued treatment due to AEs. Of the 354 pts aged ≥65 years or with ≥1 CV risk factor, infections affected 64 pts (18.1%), 34 (9.6%) had COVID-19, 2 (0.6%) had herpes zoster, and cardiac disorders (angina pectoris, atrial fibrillation, palpitations and tachycardia) affected 5 pts (1.4%);no cases of malignancies were observed. In the subgroup aged <65 years and with no CV risk factors (n=126), infections occurred in 18 pts (14.3%) (9 [7.1%] had COVID-19;3 [2.4%] had herpes zoster) and malignancies (myeloproliferative neoplasm) affected 1 pt (0.8%);no pts had cardiac disorders. There were no cases of deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism in either subgroup.ConclusionIn this interim analysis of FILOSOPHY, no unexpected safety signals emerged at up to 6 months. Although infections and cardiac disorders affected a numerically greater proportion of pts aged ≥65 years or with ≥1 CV risk vs those aged <65 years with no CV risk, longer follow-up on a broader cohort is necessary to further characterize the safety of FIL in different groups of pts with RA.Reference[1]Winthrop K, et al. Ann Rheum Dis 2022;81:184–92Table 1.Baseline characteristics and CV risk factorsBaseline demographics/CV risk factorsAll FIL-treated pts (N=480)≥65 years or with ≥1 CV risk factor (n=354)<65 years and no CV risk factor (n=126)*Female sex, n (%)351 (73.1)252 (71.2)99 (78.6)Age, years, mean (SD)57.6 (11.5)60.4 (10.8)49.6 (9.6)Rheumatoid factor positive, n (%)†228 (47.5)167 (47.2)61 (48.4)Anti-citrullinated protein antibody positive, n (%)‡243 (50.6)176 (49.7)67 (53. 2)Body mass index, kg/m2, mean (SD)27.6 (5.7) n=43728.0 (5.4) n=33126.3 (6.4) n=106RA disease duration, years, mean (SD)10.4 (9.4) n=47810.5 (9.5) n=35310.0 (8.8) n=125Tender joint count 28, mean (SD)8.6 (6.9) n=4578.7 (7.1) n=3408.3 (6.3) n=117Swollen joint count 28, mean (SD)5.6 (5.2) n=4525.7 (5.4) n=3365.4 (4.4) n=116Former smoker, n (%)§86 (17.9)86 (24.3)0Current smoker, n (%)§81 (16.9)81 (22.9)0Non-smoker, n (%)§203 (42.3)130 (36.7)73 (57.9)Family history of myocardial infarction, n (%)41 (8.5)41 (11.6)0Medical history of: n (%) CV disease33 (6.9)33 (9.3)0 Diabetes35 (7.3)35 (9.9)0 Dyslipidemia49 (10.2)49 (13.8)0 Hypertension155 (32.3)155 (43.8)0 Ischemic CNS vascular disorders11 (2.3)11 (3.1)0 Peripheral vascular disease17 (3.5)17 (4.8)0*Includes 53 pts with missing smoking status data who were aged <65 years with no other CV risk factors.†Missing/unknown in 154 pts;‡Missing in 153 pts;§Smoking status data missing in 110 pts (22.9%).AcknowledgementsWe thank the physicia s and patients who participated in this study. The study was funded by Galapagos NV, Mechelen, Belgium. Publication coordination was provided by Fabien Debailleul, PhD, of Galapagos NV. Medical writing support was provided by Debbie Sherwood, BSc, CMPP (Aspire Scientific, Bollington, UK), and funded by Galapagos NV.Disclosure of InterestsPatrick Verschueren Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Roularta, Consultant of: Celltrion, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Nordic Pharma, Sidekick Health, Grant/research support from: Galapagos, Pfizer, Jérôme Avouac Speakers bureau: AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BMS, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, Sanofi, Consultant of: AbbVie, Fresenius Kabi, Galapagos, Sanofi, Grant/research support from: BMS, Fresenius Kabi, Novartis, Pfizer, Karen Bevers Grant/research support from: Galapagos, Susana Romero-Yuste Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Biogen, BMS, Lilly, Pfizer, Consultant of: Sanofi, Lilly, Grant/research support from: Lilly, MSD, Roberto Caporali Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Celltrion, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Celltrion, Eli Lilly, Fresenius Kabi, Galapagos, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, UCB, Thomas Debray Consultant of: Biogen, Galapagos, Gilead, Francesco De Leonardis Employee of: Galapagos, James Galloway Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Biogen, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Grant/research support from: AstraZeneca, Celgene, Gilead, Janssen, Medicago, Novavax, Pfizer, Monia Zignani Shareholder of: Galapagos, Employee of: Galapagos, Gerd Rüdiger Burmester Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Chugai, Galapagos, Lilly, Pfizer, Sanofi, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Galapagos, Lilly, Pfizer, Sanofi.
ABSTRACT
High-sensitivity cardiac troponins expedite the evaluation of patients with chest pain in the emergency department. The utility of troponins extends beyond the acute coronary syndromes to accurate the diagnosis of myocardial injury. Troponins are best friends for physicians;however, they are a double-edged sword if not interpreted appropriately. Misdiagnosis is harmful with regard to patient outcomes. The present review focuses on the recent updates in the understanding and interpretation of high-sensitivity troponins in various acute clinical settings. Common mistakes and gray zones in the interpretation of troponins, the concept of myocardial injury versus infarction, newer entities like myocardial infarction (MI) with Nonobstructive Coronary Arteries, recent controversies over the definition of periprocedural MI, complementary role of imaging in the diagnosis of myocardial injury and the role of troponins in the current COVID-19 pandemic are discussed.Copyright © 2022 Saudi Center for Organ Transplantation.
ABSTRACT
The aim of the research. To study clinical and laboratory features of the new coronavirus infection (COVID-19) in order to develop a model that would allow, taking the publicly available research methods into account, to carry out early diagnosis of severe community-acquired pneumonia against the background of the new coronavirus infection. Material and methods. A total of 82 COVID-19 patients who complied with inclusion and exclusion criteria were enrolled. Depending on the clinical severity, three study groups were formed: group 1 included 13 patients with uncomplicated COVID-19, group 2 consisted of 39 patients with non-severe forms of pneumonia that developed against COVID-19 and group 3 was comprised of 30 patients with COVID-19 complicated by severe pneumonia. The groups were comparable in age and gender. All patients underwent general clinical examination, laboratory tests, including general and biochemical blood analysis, as well as chest computed tomography. Results. The clinical picture in COVID-19 patients differed depending on the disease severity. Coughing and shortness of breath were more often observed in patients with severe pneumonia;sore throat, on the contrary, was more often noted in patients with uncomplicated COVID-19. On admission to the inpatient facility, patients with severe pneumonia had higher body temperature and respiratory rate, with simultaneous decrease in blood oxygen saturation. One half of the patients with severe pneumonia had hypertensive disease in medical history, and one third had ischaemic heart disease. As a rule, uncomplicated COVID-19 patients did not have ischaemic heart disease. It was found through laboratory analysis of blood that groups of patients significantly differed in the levels of neutrophils, lymphocytes, monocytes, basophils and eosinophils. Conclusion. The use of such clinical and laboratory data as acute respiratory failure, fever, the levels of neutrophils, monocytes, lymphocytes, eosinophils and basophils makes it possible to identify patients with more severe pneumonia against the background of COVID-19 even before chest computed tomography. Key words:.Copyright © 2022, Krasnoyarsk State Medical University. All rights reserved.
ABSTRACT
Mervyn George Bishop/Fairfax Media/Getty Images Peter Sleight, a professor at Oxford University, helped to transform heart attack treatment and prevent cardiovascular disease with angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and statins. Isis methodology influenced the design of studies into other conditions, including the Recovery trial, which showed that dexamethasone reduces covid-19 mortality. [...]unlike many eminent men, he was able, endearingly, to laugh at himself—for example, when medical students lampooned him as Professor BA Flight after he had flown to Tokyo for the day. In the last 10 years of his life, he generated global media interest after demonstrating with his Italian colleague Luciano Bernardi that certain musical rhythms lowered blood pressure.
ABSTRACT
COVID-19 has been associated with a variety of cardiovascular complications, including acute myocardial injury, myocarditis, arrhythmias, and venous thromboembolism. Infection could be severe in patients with pre-existing cardiovascular disease, and, in the most severe cases of this disease, a systemic inflammatory response due to a cytokine storm can lead to acute myocardial infarction. The prognosis and clinical evolution ofpatients with COVID-19, who present these vascular complications, can be deleterious, thus, their magnitude must be determined and at-risk cases identified. In this article are presented two patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a27-year-old male with no coronary risk factors and a 63-year-old male with a history ofhigh blood pressure and smoking, both of whom developed COVID-19 and were admitted with respiratory symptoms.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: The Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 have been associated with cardiovascular adverse events including acute myocardial infarction due to a prothrombotic and hypercoagulable status, and endothelial dysfunction. Case report: We report the case of a 62-year-old women, admitted to the hospital via the emergency room for acute chest pain and dyspnea. A nasopharyngeal swab was positive for COVID19 real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction 11 day ago. On admission, she was hypotensive with systolic blood pressure measering 87 mmHg and tachycardic with 117 beats/min, oxygen saturation (SO2) was 94%. An 18-lead ECG revealed an infero-postero-lateral ST-elevation myocardial infarction with right ventricular involvement and a seconddegree- Mobitz Type 1 atrioventricular block. The coronary angiography from the right femoral artery showed acute thrombotic occlusion of the first diagonal branch with TIMI 0 flow and acute thrombotic occlusion of proximal right coronary artery with TIMI 0 flow. The most likely diagnosis was myocardial infarction secondary to a non-atherosclerotic coronary occlusion. The angioplasy was performed with dilatations with a semi compliant balloon, bailout implant of BMS, manual thrombus aspiration and intracoronary injection of tirofiban in the right coronary artery. The myocardial revascularization was ineffective. The patient developed significant severe hemodynamic instability and cardiac arrest for pulseless electric activity after 24 hours. Conclusion(s): The COVID-19 outbreak implies deep changes in the clinical profile and therapeutic management of STEMI patients who underwent PCI. At present, the natural history of coronary embolism is not well understood;however, the cardiac mortality rate are hight. This suggests these patients require further study to identify the natural history of the condition and to optimize management to improve outcome.
ABSTRACT
BackgroundSystemic sclerosis (SSc) is a severe, progressive multisystem rheumatic disease with high mortality, but without approved disease-modifying treatment to stop or reverse course of disease. Intravenous immunoglobulin G (IgG) may have a positive impact on SSc based upon available literature reports. However, to date, there have been no clinical trials evaluating subcutaneous IgG (SCIG) in SSc. In particular, the impact of pathologically altered skin in SSc on local safety and pharmacokinetics (PK) of SCIG has not been explored yet.ObjectivesThe primary and secondary objectives of this trial (NCT04137224) included safety, including local infusion safety, and bioavailability of subcutaneous IgG (IgPro20) in adults with diffuse cutaneous SSc (dcSSc).MethodsThis was a randomized, open-label, crossover study. Adult subjects with dcSSc diagnosis within 5 years from first non-Raynaud's phenomenon and modified Rodnan Skin Score of 15-45 at screening were randomized 1:1 to sequence A (IgPro20, 20% normal human subcutaneous immunoglobulin followed by IgPro10, 10% normal human intravenous immunoglobulin) or sequence B (IgPro10 followed by IgPro20). Each subject was to complete two treatment periods (16 weeks each), with up to 40 weeks (including screening) study duration for an individual subject. Doses received were 0.5g/kg/week split over two sessions for IgPro20, and 2g/kg/4 weeks split over 2-5 days for IgPro10. The primary endpoint was safety of IgPro20, described as treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and changes in clinical observations.Results27 subjects were randomized, with 13 subjects to sequence A and 14 subjects to sequence B. In total, 25 subjects completed the study. Of 27 treated subjects, 107 TEAEs occurred in 22 subjects (81.5%) over the 36-week study period, the majority of which were mild or moderate. The most common TEAEs (>10% of subjects) by preferred term (PT) were headache (12 events occurring in 6 subjects [22.2%]), COVID-19 (3 events occurring in 3 subjects [11.1%]), diarrhoea (3 events occurring in 3 subjects [11.1%]), and vomiting (3 events occurring in 3 subjects [11.1%]).A total of 10 serious AEs (SAEs) were reported in 6 subjects (Viral infection, Chronic gastritis, Vomiting, Dehydration, Upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage, Chest pain, Myocardial infarction, Myocardial ischemia, Breast cancer, Interstitial lung disease). Among these, one subject experienced 2 SAEs (myocardial ischemia & myocardial infarction) and was discontinued from study treatment. None of the SAEs were considered related to study treatment by the investigator, and no deaths were reported.For IgPro20, 14 infusion site reactions (ISRs) occurred in 5 subjects (19.2%), all were mild or moderate in severity. The most common ISRs were infusion site pain and infusion site swelling (3 events in 2 subjects each, 7.7%). In total, 686 IgPro20 infusions were performed, resulting in an overall ISR rate per infusion of 0.02, ie 2 ISRs per 100 infusions. No ISRs were reported for IgPro10.No clinically relevant trends in vital signs, body weight, clinical laboratory tests, electrocardiograms, or pulmonary function tests were observed.PK profiles and bioavailability in dcSSc subjects were similar to those observed in other approved indications such as Primary Immunodeficiency. Population relative bioavailability of IgPro20, based on dose-normalized, baseline-corrected AUC0-tau was 0.761 (90% CI: 0.7033, 0.8232), ie 76.1% compared to IgPro10 (intravenous IgG).ConclusionThe overall safety profiles of IgPro20 and IgPro10 in subjects with dcSSc were consistent with that in approved indications such as CIDP, including a relatively low ISR rate for IgPro20. PK profiles and bioavailability were also similar to other indications. This study indicates that subcutaneous administration of IgPro20 has acceptable safety, bioavailability and PK profiles in patients with dcSSc. AcknowledgementsEditorial assistance was provided by Meridian HealthComms Ltd., funded by CSL Behring.Disclosure of InterestsChristopher P Denton Speakers bureau: Ja ssen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Consultant of: GSK, CSL Behring, Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck, Roche, Sanofi, Grant/research support from: GSK, CSL Behring, Inventiva, Horizon, Otylia Kowal-Bielecka Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Janssen-Cilag, Boehringer Ingelheim, Medac, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, Consultant of: Boehringer Ingelheim and Novartis, Grant/research support from: Received congress support from Abbvie, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Medac, Susanna Proudman Speakers bureau: Boehringer Ingelheim, Grant/research support from: Janssen, Marzena Olesińska Consultant of: AstraZeneca, Margitta Worm Consultant of: Novartis Pharma GmbH, Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GmbH, DBV Technologies S.A, Aimmune Therapeutics UK Limited, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Leo Pharma GmbH, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH &Co.KG, ALK-Abelló Arzneimittel GmbH, Kymab Limited, Amgen GmbH, Abbvie Deutschland GmbH & Co. KG, Pfizer Pharma GmbH, Mylan Germany GmbH (A Viatris Company), AstraZeneca GmbH, Lilly Deutschland GmbH and GlaxoSmithKline GmbH & Co. KG., Nicoletta Del Papa Speakers bureau: Janssen Cilag, Boehringer Ingelheim., Marco Matucci-Cerinic Speakers bureau: Biogen, Sandoz, Boehringer Ingelheim, Consultant of: CSL Behring, Boehringer Ingelheim, Grant/research support from: MSD, Chemomab, Jana Radewonuk Shareholder of: CSL Behring, Employee of: CSL Behring, Jeanine Jochems Shareholder of: CSL Behring, Employee of: CSL Behring, Amgad Shebl Shareholder of: CSL Behring, Employee of: CSL Behring, Anna Krupa Shareholder of: CSL Behring, Employee of: CSL Behring, Jutta Hofmann Shareholder of: CSL Behring, Employee of: CSL Behring, Maria Gasior Shareholder of: CSL Behring, Employee of: CSL Behring.
ABSTRACT
BackgroundIn COVID-19 severe disease course such as need of intensive care unit (ICU) as well as development of mortality is mainly due to cytokine storm.ObjectivesIn this study, we aimed to evaluate the high dose intravenous anakinra treatment response and outcome in patients with severe and critical COVID-19 compared to standard of care.MethodsThis retrospective observational study was carried out at a tertiary referral center. The study population consisted of two groups as follows;the patients receiving high dose intravenous anakinra (anakinra group) between 01.09.2021 and 01.02.2022 and the patients treated with standard of care (SoC, control group) as historical control group who were hospitalized between 01.07.2021 and 01.09.2021.ResultsAfter the propensity score 1:1 matching 79 patients in anakinra and 79 patients in SoC matched and included into the analysis. Mean±SD patient age was 67.4±16.7 and 67.1±16.3 years in anakinra and SoC group, respectively (p=0.9). Male gender was 38 (48.7 %) in anakinra and 36 (46.2 %) SoC (p=0.8). Overall, ICU admission was in 14.1 % (n=11) and 30.8 % (n=24) (p=0.013;OR: 6.2), intubation in 12.8 % (n=10) and 16.7 % (n=13) patients (p=0.5), 14.1 % (n=11) and 32.1 % (n=25) patients died in anakinra and control group, respectively (p=0.008;OR: 7.1)ConclusionIn our study mortality was lower in patients receiving anakinra compared to SoC. Intravenous high dose anakinra is safe and effective treatment in patients with severe and critical COVID-19.Table 1.Baseline clinical and laboratory features of patients receiving standard of care (SoC) and Anakinra before and after propensity score (PS) matchingBefore PS matchingAfter PS matchingVariablesAnakinra (n=148)SoC (n=114)p value (OR)Anakinra (n=78)SoC (n=78)p value (OR)Age (years) (mean±SD)66.8±1763.1±170.0967.4±16.767.1±16.30.9Gender, male (n, %)78 (52.7)45 (39.5)0.033 (4.5)38 (48.7)36 (46.2)0.8Duration of hospitalization (days) (median, IQR)11 (12)9 (7.3)0.027.5 (9)11 (8)0.01Comorbidities (n, %) Diabetes mellitus41/146 (28.1)39 (34.2)0.318 (23)31 (39.7)0.025 (5) Hypertension84/143 (58.7)64 (56)0.730 (61.5)50 (64)0.7 Coronary heart disease27/143 (19)24 (21)0.718 (23)20 (25.6)0.7 Heart failure18/143 (12.6)23 (20)0.114 (18)20 (25.6)0.24 Chronic renal failure31 (21)6 (5.3)<0.001 (13.06)15 (19)6 (7.7)0.035 (4.5) Chronic obstructive lung disease23/144 (16)19 (16.7)0.914 (18)15 (19)0.8 Dementia15/117 (12.8)2 (1.8)0.001 (10.4)3/61 (5)2 (2.6)0.5 Malignancy16/146 (11)8 (7)0.39 (11.5)6 (7.7)0.4 Immunosuppressive usage18/146 (12.3)2 (1.8)0.001 (10.08)5 (6.5)2 (2.6)0.2Disease severity (n, %) NIH score 3 (severe)57 (38.5)68 (59.6)0.001 (11.5)48 (61.5)44 (56.4)0.5 NIH score 4 (critical)91 (61.5)46 (40.4)30 (38.5)34 (43.6) mcHIS score (mean±SD)3.4±1.22.64±1.5<0.0012.9±13.1±1.30.2PS: Propensity score, SoC: Standard of care, OR: Odds ratio, SD: Standard deviation, IQR: Interquartile range, mcHIS: Modified Covid hyperinflammatory syndrome score, NIH: National Institute Health, ALT: Alanin aminotransferase, AST: Aspartate aminotransferaseTable 2.Outcomes of patients receiving SoC and Anakinra before and after PS matchingBefore PS matchingAfter PS matchingVariables (n, %)Anakinra (n=148)SoC (n=114)p value (OR)Anakinra (n=78)SoC (n=78)p value (OR)Pneumothorax3/134 (2.2)00.25*2/73 (2.7)00.5*Myocardial infarction3/132 (2.3)6 (5.3)0.32/72 (2.8)2/56 (3.6)1Pulmonary embolism4/134 (3)11 (9.6)0.034 (4.8)*3/73 (4.1)7 (9)0.3*Intensive care unit60 (40.5)25 (22)0.001 (10.2)11 (14.1)24 (30.8)0.013 (6.2)Intubation54 (36.5)13 (11.4)<0.001 (21.3)10 (12.8)13 (16.7)0.5Mortality56 (37.8)27 (23.7)0.015 (5.96)11 (14.1)25 (32.1)0.008 (7.1)PS: Propensity score, SoC: Standard of care, OR: Odds ratioREFERENCES:NIL.Acknowledgements:NIL.Disclosure of InterestsNone Declared.
ABSTRACT
Body weight and fat content are known to influence the timing of puberty but the association remained after adjustment for pre-pubertal body mass index. [...]a large retrospective study from the US finds that patients who underwent plasma exchange spent a week longer in hospital and were two to three times more likely to die than those who received immunoglobulin (Muscle Nerve doi:10.1002/mus.26831). A case study in NEJM Catalyst identifies early testing (particularly of people arriving from places where the disease was prevalent), rapid mobilisation of microbiological laboratories, and a coherent and consistent national strategy as crucial interventions.
ABSTRACT
AIM: To assess the effect of pandemic COVID-19 on the course of STEMI patients of the Regional Vascular Center in 2020, compared with the previous year. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with acute coronary syndrome and, in particular, STEMI hospitalized at Regional Vascular Center in 2019 and 2020. RESULTS: In 2019, 981 patients with STEMI were admitted; in 2020 - 728 patients. The baseline clinical and demographic patients characteristics did not differ significantly. In 2020, the number of pneumonia has doubled, the number of mechanical ventilator support has increased by 20%; sepsis was diagnosed 5 times more often. However, patients in 2020 were less likely to develop delirium, minor and major bleeding. There were more patients admitted in the 1st day of the disease, and they were more frequently performed both primary angioplasty and angioplasty in general. Patients with STEMI in 2020 had more frequently registered pulmonary edema, cardiogenic shock and re-infarction. Lethality in the group of patients without angioplasty tended to be higher in 2020 compared with the previous year. None of 30 patients with COVID-19 died in our department, they were timely transferred either to COVID-hospital or to outpatient follow-up care. When analyzing various parameters during the spring and autumn periods, which were the peak periods for pneumonias in 2020, only mortality had a clear upward trend. CONCLUSION: The patient portrait of myocardial infarction in 2020 was dominated by pneumonia, sepsis, and re-infarction compared with the previous year. An upward trend in mortality was detected in those without angioplasty and those hospitalized in the spring and autumn wave of COVID-19. We believe that there are hidden mechanisms of pandemic effect on mortality in STEMI.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Myocardial Infarction , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/therapy , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/therapy , PandemicsABSTRACT
Although myocardial infarction (MI) primarily affects patients over the age of 45, it can also affect young women and men. Still, when it occurs at an early age, it has severe morbidity and psychological and financial burdens for the patient and his or her relatives. Four classes can be used to categorize the causes of MI in individuals below the age of 45. These are drug abuse-related MI, hyper-coagulable conditions, atheromatous coronary artery disease (CAD), and non-atheromatous CAD. There is a significant overlap between each category. Elevated blood pressure, smoking, diabetes, obesity, high cholesterol, inactivity, an unbalanced diet, binge drinking alcohol, and related substances are all risk factors. The primary mechanism of an MI is typically the total obstruction of a vessel caused by breaking an atheromatous plaque. This article covers the research and focuses on the practical concerns related to young adults with MI.
ABSTRACT
The coronavirus disease 2019, also known as the COVID-19 pandemic has had a deleterious impact on daily living, with health and socioeconomic effects of a global magnitude. Acute coronary syndrome (ACS), an important cardiovascular disease with significant morbidity and mortality rates, has been frequently reported in patients with this novel virus. This review aims to discuss the potential associations between COVID-19 and ACS with the use of multiple databases, including but not limited to; PubMed, ScienceDirect, World Health Organization, and American Heart Association. We have explored the pathophysiology of ACS, focusing on COVID-19 in particular with the use of various works of literature that highlights the pattern of viral entry and replication via the angiotensin-converting enzyme II. The review has also discussed the impact of the pandemic on hospital admissions, diagnosis, and management of ACS patients, as well as briefly highlighted a possible link between the widely available COVID-19 vaccines and possible cardiovascular complications. The association between COVID-19 and ACS needs more in-depth studies to help establish whether there exists a direct causal and or inciting correlation between them. Understanding this association might lead to new research and treatment options for ACS patients.
ABSTRACT
Background/study objective: The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic affected health care delivery, as it led to variable outcomes in different disease states including cardiovascular diseases. In this study, we evaluated the impact of coexisting COVID-19 on Acute Myocardial Infarction (AMI). Design/setting: We analyzed discharge records of AMI patients from the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) in the year 2020. Main outcome measures: Using propensity score matching, we assessed the impact of COVID-19 infection on the in-hospital outcomes of patients presenting with AMI. Results: There were 1154 patients with concomitant COVID-19 infection and AMI who were matched with 109,990 patients with AMI and without COVID-19. We found that patients with COVID-19 who had AMI were less likely to have dyslipidemia (64.6 % vs. 70.4 %, p < 0.001), peripheral vascular disease (2.4 % vs. 3.8 % p = 0.0017), smoking history (23.5 % vs. 28.2 % p < 0.0001) and hypertension (37.1 % vs. 40.1 % p = 0.004).COVID-19 was associated with higher hospital mortality rates (Adjusted odds ratio aOR: 2.72, CI: 2.23-3.30, p < 0.001), cardiac arrest (aOR: 1.65, 95 % CI: 1.26-2.15, p < 0.001), cardiogenic shock (aOR:1.36,95 % CI: 1.10-1.68, p = 0.004) and respiratory failure (aOR:1.81, 95 % CI: 1.55-2.11 p < 0.001) compared to AMI patients without COVID-19. There was also a significant association between coexisting COVID-19 and longer duration of hospital stay (Adjusted mean differences:1.40, 95 % CI: 1.31-1.59 p < 0.0001) in AMI patients. Conclusion: COVID-19 infection is associated with worse in-hospital mortality and cardiorespiratory complications in patients with AMI.
ABSTRACT
AIMS: As a consequence of untimely or missed revascularization of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients during the COVID-19 pandemic, many patients died at home or survived with serious sequelae, resulting in potential long-term worse prognosis and related health-economic implications.This analysis sought to predict long-term health outcomes [survival and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs)] and cost of reduced treatment of STEMIs occurring during the first COVID-19 lockdown. METHODS AND RESULTS: Using a Markov decision-analytic model, we incorporated probability of hospitalization, timeliness of PCI, and projected long-term survival and cost (including societal costs) of mortality and morbidity, for STEMI occurring during the first UK and Spanish lockdowns, comparing them with expected pre-lockdown outcomes for an equivalent patient group.STEMI patients during the first UK lockdown were predicted to lose an average of 1.55 life-years and 1.17 QALYs compared with patients presenting with a STEMI pre-pandemic. Based on an annual STEMI incidence of 49 332 cases, the total additional lifetime costs calculated at the population level were £36.6 million (41.3 million), mainly driven by costs of work absenteeism. Similarly in Spain, STEMI patients during the lockdown were expected to survive 2.03 years less than pre-pandemic patients, with a corresponding reduction in projected QALYs (-1.63). At the population level, reduced PCI access would lead to additional costs of 88.6 million. CONCLUSION: The effect of a 1-month lockdown on STEMI treatment led to a reduction in survival and QALYs compared to the pre-pandemic era. Moreover, in working-age patients, untimely revascularization led to adverse prognosis, affecting societal productivity and therefore considerably increasing societal costs.
ABSTRACT
Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) treatment requires timely diagnosis and treatment for optimal health outcomes. The Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) pandemic has caused changes in health-care delivery and utilization; therefore, the present study explored the changes in emergency care quality indicators for patients with AMI before and during different periods of government response to the COVID-19 outbreak in Taiwan. The Taiwan Clinical Performance Indicators database was used to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on acute care quality indicators for patients with AMI during four periods: before the COVID-19 outbreak (Period I-1 January to 31 December 2019) and during three periods in which the central government imposed different levels of epidemic prevention and response alerts (Period II-1 January 2020 to 30 April 2021; Period III-1 May to 31 July 2021; and Period IV-1 August to 31 December 2021). A 15.9% decrease in monthly emergency department admission for patients with AMI occurred during Period III. The hospital 'door-to-electrocardiogram time being <10 min' indicator attainment was significantly lower during Periods III and IV. The attainment of 'dual antiplatelet therapy received within 6 hr of emergency department arrival' indicator improved in Period IV, whereas 'the primary percutaneous coronary intervention being received within 90 min of hospital arrival' indicator significantly decreased during Periods III and IV. The indicator 'in-hospital mortality' was unchanged within the study duration. Overall, the quality of care for patients with AMI was mildly influenced during the assessed pandemic periods, especially in terms of door-to-electrocardiogram time of <10 min and primary percutaneous coronary intervention received within 90 min of hospital arrival (Period III). Using our study results, hospitals can develop strategies regarding care delivery for patients with AMI during a COVID-19 outbreak on the basis of central government alert levels, even during the height of the pandemic.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Emergency Medical Services , Myocardial Infarction , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , Humans , Pandemics , COVID-19/epidemiology , Taiwan/epidemiology , Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/methodsABSTRACT
The experience of managing patients with COVID-19 around the world has shown that, although respiratory symptoms predominate during the man-ifestation of infection, then many patients can develop serious damage to the cardiovascular system. However, coronary artery disease (CHD) remains the leading cause of death worldwide. The purpose of the review is to clarify the possible pathogenetic links between COVID-19 and acute coronary syndrome (ACS), taking into account which will help to optimize the management of patients with comorbid pathology. Among the body's responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection, which increase the likelihood of developing ACS, the role of systemic inflammation, the quintessence of which is a "cytokine storm" that can destabilize an atherosclerotic plaque is discussed. Coagulopathy, typical for patients with Covid-19, is based on immunothrombosis, caused by a complex interaction between neutrophilic extracellular traps and von Willebrandt factor in conditions of systemic inflammation. The im-plementation of a modern strategy for managing patients with ACS, focused on the priority of percutaneous interventions (PCI), during a pandemic is experiencing great difficulties due to the formation of time delays before the start of invasive procedures due to the epidemiological situation. Despite this, the current European, American and Russian recommendations for the management of infected patients with ACS confirm the inviolability of the position of PCI as the first choice for treating patients with ACS and the undesirability of replacing invasive treatment with thrombolysis.