Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 26
Filter
1.
JAMA Intern Med ; 183(5): 407-415, 2023 05 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2279631

ABSTRACT

Importance: To our knowledge, no randomized clinical trial has compared the invasive and conservative strategies in frail, older patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). Objective: To compare outcomes of invasive and conservative strategies in frail, older patients with NSTEMI at 1 year. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter randomized clinical trial was conducted at 13 Spanish hospitals between July 7, 2017, and January 9, 2021, and included 167 older adult (≥70 years) patients with frailty (Clinical Frailty Scale score ≥4) and NSTEMI. Data analysis was performed from April 2022 to June 2022. Interventions: Patients were randomized to routine invasive (coronary angiography and revascularization if feasible; n = 84) or conservative (medical treatment with coronary angiography for recurrent ischemia; n = 83) strategy. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the number of days alive and out of the hospital (DAOH) from discharge to 1 year. The coprimary end point was the composite of cardiac death, reinfarction, or postdischarge revascularization. Results: The study was prematurely stopped due to the COVID-19 pandemic when 95% of the calculated sample size had been enrolled. Among the 167 patients included, the mean (SD) age was 86 (5) years, and mean (SD) Clinical Frailty Scale score was 5 (1). While not statistically different, DAOH were about 1 month (28 days; 95% CI, -7 to 62) greater for patients managed conservatively (312 days; 95% CI, 289 to 335) vs patients managed invasively (284 days; 95% CI, 255 to 311; P = .12). A sensitivity analysis stratified by sex did not show differences. In addition, we found no differences in all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 1.45; 95% CI, 0.74-2.85; P = .28). There was a 28-day shorter survival in the invasive vs conservatively managed group (95% CI, -63 to 7 days; restricted mean survival time analysis). Noncardiac reasons accounted for 56% of the readmissions. There were no differences in the number of readmissions or days spent in the hospital after discharge between groups. Neither were there differences in the coprimary end point of ischemic cardiac events (subdistribution hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.54-1.57; P = .78). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial of NSTEMI in frail older patients, there was no benefit to a routine invasive strategy in DAOH during the first year. Based on these findings, a policy of medical management and watchful observation is recommended for older patients with frailty and NSTEMI. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03208153.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Frailty , Myocardial Infarction , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction , Humans , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/mortality , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Myocardial Infarction/mortality , Conservative Treatment , Aftercare , Pandemics , Angina, Unstable/therapy , Patient Discharge , Coronary Angiography
2.
Int J Qual Health Care ; 34(4)2022 Nov 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2087792

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Since the beginning of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in 2019, several countries have reported a substantial drop in the number of patients admitted with non-ST-segment myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the changes in admissions, in-hospital management and outcomes of patients with NSTEMI in the COVID-19 era in a nationwide survey. METHOD: A prospective, multicenter, observational, nationwide study involving 13 medical centers across Israel aimed to evaluate consecutive patients with NSTEMI admitted to intensive cardiac care units over an 8-week period during the COVID-19 outbreak and to compare them with NSTEMI patients admitted at the same period 2 years earlier (control period). RESULTS: There were 624 (43%) NSTEMI patients, of whom 349 (56%) were hospitalized during the COVID-19 era and 275 (44%) during the control period. There were no significant differences in age, gender and other baseline characteristics between the two study periods. During the COVID-19 era, more patients arrived at the hospital via an emergency medical system compared with the control period (P = 0.05). Time from symptom onset to hospital admission was longer in the COVID-19 era as compared with the control period [11.5 h (interquartile range, IQR, 2.5-46.7) vs. 2.9 h (IQR 1.7-6.8), respectively, P < 0.001]. Nevertheless, the time from hospital admission to reperfusion was similar in both groups. The rate of coronary angiography was also similar in both groups. The in-hospital mortality rate was similar in both the COVID-19 era and the control period groups (2.3% vs. 4.7%, respectively, P = 0.149) as was the 30-day mortality rate (3.7% vs. 5.1%, respectively, P = 0.238). CONCLUSION: In contrast to previous reports, admission rates of NSTEMI were similar in this nationwide survey during the COVID-19 era. With longer time from symptoms to admission, but with the same time from hospital admission to reperfusion therapy and with similar in-hospital and 30-day mortality rates. Even in times of crisis, adherence of medical systems to clinical practice guidelines ensures the preservation of good clinical outcomes.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Myocardial Infarction , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , Humans , Pandemics , COVID-19/epidemiology , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Prospective Studies , Israel/epidemiology , Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , Myocardial Infarction/therapy
3.
Minerva Cardiol Angiol ; 70(4): 421-427, 2022 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1975635

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: On March 9, 2020, the Italian government imposed a national lockdown to tackle the COronaVIrus Disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic, including stay at home recommendations. The precise impact of COVID-19 scare and lockdown on emergency access for acute myocardial infarction (MI) is still subject to debate. METHODS: Data on all patients undergoing invasive coronary angiography at 9 hospitals in the greater area of Rome, Italy, between February 19, 2020 and March 29, 2020 were retrospectively collected. Incidence of ST-elevation MI (STEMI), and non-ST-elevation MI (NSTEMI), as well as corresponding percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), was compared distinguishing two different 20-day time periods (before vs. on or after March 10, 2020). RESULTS: During the study period, 1068 patients underwent coronary angiography, 142 (13%) with STEMI and 169 (16%) with NSTEMI. The average daily number of STEMI decreased from 4.3 before the lockdown to 2.9 after the lockdown (P=0.021). Similarly, the average daily number of NSTEMI changed from 5.0 to 3.5 (P=0.028). The average daily number of primary PCI changed from 4.2 to 2.9 (P=0.030), while the average daily number of PCI for NSTEMI changed from 3.5 to 2.5 (P=0.087). For STEMI patients, the time from symptom onset to hospital arrival (onset-to-door time less than three hours) showed a significant increase after the lockdown (P=0.018), whereas door-to-balloon time did not change significantly from before to after the lockdown (P=0.609). CONCLUSIONS: The present study, originally reporting on the trends in STEMI and NSTEMI in the Rome area, highlights that significant decreases in the incidence of both acute coronary syndromes occurred between February 19, 2020 and March 29, 2020, together with increases in time from symptom onset to hospital arrival, luckily without changes in door-to-balloon time.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Myocardial Infarction , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction , COVID-19/epidemiology , Communicable Disease Control , Humans , Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Pandemics/prevention & control , Retrospective Studies , Rome/epidemiology , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/surgery
4.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 101(30): e29596, 2022 Jul 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1967937

ABSTRACT

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) resulted in a marked decrease in the number of patient visits for acute myocardial infarction and delayed patient response and intervention in several countries. This study evaluated the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the number of patients, patient response time (pain-to-door), and intervention time (door-to-balloon) for patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). Patients with STEMI or NSTEMI visiting a hospital in South Korea who underwent primary coronary intervention during the COVID-19 pandemic (January 29, 2020, to December 31, 2020) were compared with those in the equivalent period from 2018 to 2019. Patient response and intervention times were compared for the COVID-19 pandemic window (2020) and the equivalent period from 2018 to 2019. We observed no decrease in the number of patients with STEMI (P = .88) and NSTEMI (P = 1.00) during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to that in the previous years. Patient response times (STEMI: P = .39; NSTEMI: P = .59) during the overall COVID-19 pandemic period did not differ significantly. However, we identified a significant decrease in door-to-balloon time among patients with STEMI (14%; P < .01) during the early COVID-19 pandemic. We found that the number of patients with STEMI and NSTEMI was consistent during the COVID-19 pandemic and that no time delays in patient response and intervention occurred. However, the door-to-balloon time among patients with STEMI significantly reduced during the early COVID-19 pandemic, which could be attributed to decreased emergency care utilization during the early pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Myocardial Infarction , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans , Myocardial Infarction/etiology , Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/etiology , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Pandemics , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/adverse effects , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/etiology , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
5.
BMC Cardiovasc Disord ; 22(1): 194, 2022 04 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1817181

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 affects healthcare resource allocation, which could lead to treatment delay and poor outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). We assessed the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on AMI outcomes. METHODS: We compared outcomes of patients admitted for acute ST-elevation MI (STEMI) and non-STEMI (NSTEMI) during a non-COVID-19 pandemic period (January-February 2019; Group 1, n = 254) and a COVID-19 pandemic period (January-February 2020; Group 2, n = 124). RESULTS: For STEMI patients, the median of first medical contact (FMC) time, door-to-balloon time, and total myocardial ischemia time were significantly longer in Group 2 patients (all p < 0.05). Primary percutaneous intervention was performed significantly more often in Group 1 patients than in Group 2 patients, whereas thrombolytic therapy was used significantly more often in Group 2 patients than in Group 1 patients (all p < 0.05). However, the rates of and all-cause 30-day mortality and major adverse cardiac event (MACE) were not significantly different in the two periods (all p > 0.05). For NSTEMI patients, Group 2 patients had a higher rate of conservative therapy, a lower rate of reperfusion therapy, and longer FMC times (all p < 0.05). All-cause 30-day mortality and MACE were only higher in NSTEMI patients during the COVID-19 pandemic period (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 pandemic causes treatment delay in AMI patients and potentially leads to poor clinical outcome in NSTEMI patients. Thrombolytic therapy should be initiated without delay for STEMI when coronary intervention is not readily available; for NSTEMI patients, outcomes of invasive reperfusion were better than medical treatment.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Myocardial Infarction , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction , Humans , Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Pandemics , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
6.
J Am Coll Cardiol ; 79(4): 311-323, 2022 02 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1708070

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Recently, the number of patients presenting with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) has reduced, whereas increased mortality was reported. A plausible explanation for increased mortality was prehospital delay because of patients' reticence of their symptoms. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to investigate the association between prehospital delay and clinical outcomes in patients with NSTEMI METHODS: Among 13,104 patients from the Korea-Acute-Myocardial-Infarction-Registry-National Institutes of Health, the authors evaluated 6,544 patients with NSTEMI. Study patients were categorized into 2 groups according to symptom-to-door (StD) time (<24 or ≥24 hours). The primary outcome was 3-year all-cause mortality, and the secondary outcome was 3-year composite of all-cause mortality, recurrent MI, and hospitalization for heart failure. RESULTS: Overall, 1,827 (27.9%) patients were classified into the StD time ≥24 hours group. The StD time ≥24 hours group had higher all-cause mortality (17.0% vs 10.5%; P < 0.001) and incidence of secondary outcomes (23.3% vs 15.7%; P < 0.001) than the StD time <24 hours group. The higher all-cause mortality in the StD time ≥24 hours group was observed consistently in the subgroup analysis regarding age, sex, atypical chest pain, dyspnea, Q-wave in electrocardiogram, use of emergency medical services, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney disease, left ventricle dysfunction, TIMI (Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction) flow, and the GRACE risk score. In the multivariable analysis, independent predictors of prehospital delay were the elderly, women, nonspecific symptoms such as atypical chest pain or dyspnea, diabetes, and no use of emergency medical services. CONCLUSIONS: Prehospital delay is associated with an increased risk of 3-year all-cause mortality in patients with NSTEMI. (iCReaT Study No. C110016).


Subject(s)
Hospitalization , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/mortality , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Time-to-Treatment , Aged , Emergency Medical Services , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Myocardial Revascularization , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/complications , Registries , Republic of Korea , Risk Factors , Survival Rate , Symptom Assessment
7.
Open Heart ; 8(1)2021 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1166562

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine the prevalence and outcome of occult infection with SARS-CoV-2 and influenza in patients presenting with myocardial infarction (MI) without COVID-19 symptoms. METHODS: We conducted an observational study from 28 June to 11 August 2020, enrolling patients admitted to the National Institute of Cardiovascular Disease Hospital, Dhaka, Bangladesh, with ST-segment elevation MI (STEMI) or non-ST-segment elevation MI who did not meet WHO criteria for suspected COVID-19. Samples were collected by nasopharyngeal swab to test for SARS-CoV-2 and influenza virus by real-time reverse transcriptase PCR. We followed up patients at 3 months (13 weeks) postadmission to record adverse cardiovascular outcomes: all-cause death, new MI, heart failure and new percutaneous coronary intervention or stent thrombosis. Survival analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: We enrolled 280 patients with MI, 79% male, mean age 54.5±11.8 years, 140 of whom were diagnosed with STEMI. We found 36 (13%) to be infected with SARS-CoV-2 and 1 with influenza. There was no significant difference between mortality rate observed among SARS-CoV-2 infected patients compared with non-infected (5 (14%) vs 26 (11%); p=0.564). A numerically shorter median time to a recurrent cardiovascular event was recorded among SARS-CoV-2 infected compared with non-infected patients (21 days, IQR: 8-46 vs 27 days, IQR: 7-44; p=0.378). CONCLUSION: We found a substantial rate of occult SARS-CoV-2 infection in the studied cohort, suggesting SARS-CoV-2 may precipitate MI. Asymptomatic patients with COVID-19 admitted with MI may contribute to disease transmission and warrants widespread testing of hospital admissions.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , Undiagnosed Diseases , Adult , Aged , Bangladesh/epidemiology , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/mortality , Disease Progression , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Middle Aged , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/mortality , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Predictive Value of Tests , Prevalence , Prognosis , Prospective Studies , Recurrence , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/mortality , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Time Factors
8.
Intern Emerg Med ; 16(8): 2077-2086, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1152109

ABSTRACT

A significant decline in the admission to intensive cardiac care unit (ICCU) has been noted in Italy during the COVID-19 outbreak. Previous studies have provided data on clinical features and outcome of these patients, but information is still incomplete. In this multicenter study conducted in six ICCUs, we enrolled consecutive adult patients admitted to ICCU in three specific time intervals: from February 8 to March 9, 2020 [before national lockdown (pre-LD)], from March 10 to April 9, 2020 [during the first period of national lockdown (in-LD)] and from May 18 to June 17, 2020 [soon after the end of all containment measures (after-LD)]. Compared to pre-LD, in-LD was associated with a significant drop in the admission to ICCU for all causes (- 35%) and acute coronary syndrome (ACS; - 49%), with a rebound soon after-LD. The in-LD reduction was greater for women (- 49%) and NSTEMI (- 61%) compared to men (- 28%) and STEMI (- 33%). Length-of-stay, and in-hospital mortality did not show any significant change from to pre-LD to in-LD in the whole population as well as in the ACS group. This study confirms a notable reduction in the admissions to ICCUs from pre-LD to in-LD followed by an increment in the admission rates after-LD. These data strongly suggest that people, particularly women and patients with NSTEMI, are reluctant to seek medical care during lockdown, possibly due to the fear of viral infection. Such a phenomenon, however, was not associated with a rise in mortality among patients who get hospitalization.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Coronary Care Units , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , Patient Admission/trends , Acute Coronary Syndrome/epidemiology , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/therapy , Comorbidity , Female , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Patient Admission/statistics & numerical data , Risk Assessment
9.
Heart ; 107(9): 734-740, 2021 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1123608

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: There are concerns that healthcare and outcomes of black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) communities are disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. We investigated admission rates, treatment and mortality of BAME with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) during COVID-19. METHODS: Using multisource national healthcare records, patients hospitalised with AMI in England during 1 February-27 May 2020 were included in the COVID-19 group, whereas patients admitted during the same period in the previous three consecutive years were included in a pre-COVID-19 group. Multilevel hierarchical regression analyses were used to quantify the changes in-hospital and 7-day mortality in BAME compared with whites. RESULTS: Of 73 746 patients, higher proportions of BAME patients (16.7% vs 10.1%) were hospitalised with AMI during the COVID-19 period compared with pre-COVID-19. BAME patients admitted during the COVID-19 period were younger, male and likely to present with ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction. COVID-19 BAME group admitted with non-ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction less frequently received coronary angiography (86.1% vs 90.0%, p<0.001) and had a longer median delay to reperfusion (4.1 hours vs 3.7 hours, p<0.001) compared with whites. BAME had higher in-hospital (OR 1.68, 95% CI 1.27 to 2.28) and 7-day mortality (OR 1.81 95% CI 1.31 to 2.19) during COVID-19 compared with pre-COVID-19 period. CONCLUSION: In this multisource linked cohort study, compared with whites, BAME patients had proportionally higher hospitalisation rates with AMI, less frequently received guidelines indicated care and had higher early mortality during COVID-19 period compared with pre-COVID-19 period. There is a need to develop clinical pathways to achieve equity in the management of these vulnerable populations.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Critical Pathways , Healthcare Disparities , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/therapy , Coronary Angiography/methods , Coronary Angiography/statistics & numerical data , Critical Pathways/organization & administration , Critical Pathways/standards , England/epidemiology , Female , Health Services Needs and Demand , Healthcare Disparities/standards , Healthcare Disparities/statistics & numerical data , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/ethnology , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care , Race Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/ethnology , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/therapy
13.
Eur Heart J ; 41(19): 1839-1851, 2020 05 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-260376

ABSTRACT

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic poses an unprecedented challenge to healthcare worldwide. The infection can be life threatening and require intensive care treatment. The transmission of the disease poses a risk to both patients and healthcare workers. The number of patients requiring hospital admission and intensive care may overwhelm health systems and negatively affect standard care for patients presenting with conditions needing emergency interventions. This position statements aims to assist cardiologists in the invasive management of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. To that end, we assembled a panel of interventional cardiologists and acute cardiac care specialists appointed by the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) and from the Acute Cardiovascular Care Association (ACVC) and included the experience from the first and worst affected areas in Europe. Modified diagnostic and treatment algorithms are proposed to adapt evidence-based protocols for this unprecedented challenge. Various clinical scenarios, as well as management algorithms for patients with a diagnosed or suspected COVID-19 infection, presenting with ST- and non-ST-segment elevation ACS are described. In addition, we address the need for re-organization of ACS networks, with redistribution of hub and spoke hospitals, as well as for in-hospital reorganization of emergency rooms and cardiac units, with examples coming from multiple European countries. Furthermore, we provide a guidance to reorganization of catheterization laboratories and, importantly, measures for protection of healthcare providers involved with invasive procedures.


Subject(s)
Acute Coronary Syndrome/therapy , Cardiology/standards , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Acute Coronary Syndrome/virology , COVID-19 , Cardiology/methods , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Humans , Infection Control/methods , Infection Control/standards , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/virology , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/therapy , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/virology
14.
Ther Adv Cardiovasc Dis ; 14: 1753944720977732, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-961278

ABSTRACT

AIMS: To determine whether the number of patients presenting with acute coronary syndromes has reduced during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Numbers of primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) activations, ST elevation myocardial infarctions (STEMIs) and non-ST elevation myocardial infarctions (NSTEMIs) in a large tertiary Greater London centre and a large district general hospital, both of which have on-site heart attack centres, were collected. We compared the number of PPCI activations, STEMI, NSTEMIs and all MIs prior to the COVID-19 era (January to third week of February 2020), after the start of some COVID-19 restrictions taking place (fourth week of February 2020) and after formal instruction by the United Kingdom Government that all citizens were to observe strict social distancing measures (20 March 2020). We further obtained data for the corresponding weekly figures from 2019. RESULTS: The average weekly figure of all myocardial infarction in 2020, prior to the COVID-19 social distancing restrictions/awareness in the UK (beginning of January to third week of February), did not differ when compared with corresponding weeks in 2019 (23.3 ± 5.4 in 2019 versus 21.13 ± 3.5, p = 0.411).With increased media reporting and associated public awareness of the threat of COVID-19 (last week of February), there was a significant reduction in all myocardial infarction (27.1 ± 4.7 in 2019 versus 15.9 ± 3.6 in 2020, p < 0.001). Following official governmental instruction that mandated strict social distancing and the 'stay at home' campaign, the weekly figures of STEMI (15 ± 3.5 in 2019 versus 10 ± 4.4 in 2020, p = 0.013), NSTEMI (13 ± 2.6 in 2019 versus 4.7 ± 2.3 in 2020, p = 0.038) and all myocardial infarction (28 ± 6.1 in 2019 versus 14.7 ± 5.7 in 2020, p = 0.008) have remained significantly reduced. CONCLUSION: We have observed an unexpected major decline in presentations (and treatment) of the entire spectrum of acute coronary syndromes following the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic and nationwide public-health measures that have promoted the importance of strict social distancing and self-quarantine.


Subject(s)
Acute Coronary Syndrome/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , Acute Coronary Syndrome/diagnosis , Acute Coronary Syndrome/therapy , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/diagnosis , Female , Heart Disease Risk Factors , Humans , London/epidemiology , Male , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/trends , Retrospective Studies , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Time Factors
15.
J Thromb Thrombolysis ; 52(1): 95-104, 2021 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-926192

ABSTRACT

Although a reduction in hospital admissions of acute coronary syndromes (ACS) patients has been observed globally during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, clinical features of those patients have not been fully investigated. The aim of the present analysis is to investigate the incidence, clinical presentation, and outcomes of patients with ACS during the COVID-19 pandemic. We performed a retrospective analysis of consecutive patients who were admitted for ACS at our institution between March 1 and April 20, 2020 and compared with the equivalent period in 2019. Admissions for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) reduced by 39.5% in 2020 compared with the equivalent period in 2019. Owing to the emergency medical services (EMS) of our region, all time components of ST-elevated myocardial infarction care were similar during the COVID-19 outbreak as compared with the previous year's dataset. Among the 106 ACS patients in 2020, 7 patients tested positive for COVID-19. Higher incidence of type 2 myocardial infarction (29% vs. 4%, p = 0.0497) and elevated D-dimer levels (5650 µg/l [interquartile range (IQR) 1905-13,625 µg/l] vs. 400 µg/l [IQR 270-1050 µg/l], p = 0.02) were observed in COVID-19 patients. In sum, a significant reduction in admission for AMI was observed during the COVID-19 pandemic. COVID-19 patients were characterized by elevated D-dimer levels on admission, reflecting enhanced COVID-19 related thrombogenicity. The prehospital evaluation by EMS may have played an important role for the timely revascularization for STEMI patients.


Subject(s)
Acute Coronary Syndrome/therapy , Angina, Unstable/therapy , COVID-19/therapy , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Acute Coronary Syndrome/diagnosis , Acute Coronary Syndrome/epidemiology , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Angina, Unstable/diagnosis , Angina, Unstable/epidemiology , Biomarkers/blood , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Emergency Medical Services , Female , Fibrin Fibrinogen Degradation Products/analysis , Humans , Incidence , Male , Middle Aged , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , Patient Admission , Retrospective Studies , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , Time Factors , Time-to-Treatment , Treatment Outcome
16.
J Cardiovasc Pharmacol ; 76(5): 540-548, 2020 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-917717

ABSTRACT

The outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has rapidly spread worldwide. This study sought to share our experiences with in-hospital management and outcomes of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) during the COVID-19 pandemic. We retrospectively analyzed consecutive AMI patients, including those with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-STEMI (NSTEMI), from February 1, 2020, to April 15, 2020 (during the COVID-19 pandemic), and from January 1, 2019, to December 31, 2019 (before the COVID-19 pandemic), respectively. Fifty-three AMI patients (31 STEMI, 22 NSTEMI) during the COVID-19 pandemic were matched to 53 AMI patients before the pandemic. Baseline characteristics were comparable between the matched patients. STEMI patients during the COVID-19 pandemic had a longer delay time, less primary or remedial PCI and more emergency thrombolysis than those before the pandemic. Less coronary angiography and stenting were performed in AMI patients during the COVID-19 pandemic than before the pandemic. There were no statistically significant differences in the clinical outcomes between the matched patients. However, STEMI patients during the COVID-19 pandemic had a 4-fold (12.9% vs. 3.2%) increase in all-cause mortality rate compared with those before the pandemic. AMI combined with COVID-19 infection was associated with higher rates of mortality than AMI alone. This study demonstrates that the COVID-19 pandemic results in significant reperfusion delays in STEMI patients and has a marked impact on the treatment options selection in AMI patients. The mortality rate of STEMI patients exhibits an increasing trend during the pandemic of COVID-19.


Subject(s)
Cardiology Service, Hospital/trends , Coronavirus Infections , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care/trends , Pandemics , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/trends , Pneumonia, Viral , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Thrombolytic Therapy/trends , Time-to-Treatment/trends , Aged , COVID-19 , China , Coronary Angiography/trends , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/mortality , Patient Admission , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/adverse effects , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/instrumentation , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/mortality , Thrombolytic Therapy/adverse effects , Thrombolytic Therapy/mortality , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
17.
Circ Cardiovasc Interv ; 13(11): e009654, 2020 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-901506

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Angina Pectoris/therapy , COVID-19 , England , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Young Adult
18.
J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown) ; 22(5): 350-356, 2021 05 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-902312

ABSTRACT

AIMS: During the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic, a worldwide reduction in total acute coronary syndrome (ACS) has been reported. In early 2020, Italy became the most affected country and national lockdown was declared early on in March. We described trends in ACS from all the Marche coronary catheterization laboratories (CCL) during the global pandemic. METHODS: Retrospective study of all consecutive patients admitted to the four regional CCL. The coronavirus disease 2019 period (20 February 2020 to 15 April 2020) was compared with the interyear control period (1 January 2020 to 19 February 2020) and to the intrayear control period (20 February 2019 to 15 April 2019). All patients with an initial diagnosis of ACS were included in the analysis, and further stratified into ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-STEMI (NSTEMI)/unstable angina. RESULTS: A total of 1239 patients were enrolled. Daily incidence of ACS was 6.1, 6.3 and 4.5 for the interyear control period, the intrayear control period and the case period, respectively. There was no difference in overall STEMI daily incidence while NSTEMI/unstable angina fell from 3.6 and 3.3-1.8 during the case period (P = 0.01). Incidence rate ratios were significantly lower when the case period was compared with the intrayear control period (incidence rate ratios: 0.49, 95% confidence interval 0.41-0.59, P = 0.001) and the interyear control period (incidence rate ratios: 0.67, 95% confidence interval 0.50-0.90, P = 0.008). CONCLUSION: During the global pandemic there was a significant reduction in total ACS and NSTEMI in the Marche region. Unlike previous reports, there was no difference in overall access to CCL for STEMI during the same period.


Subject(s)
Acute Coronary Syndrome/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , Acute Coronary Syndrome/diagnosis , Acute Coronary Syndrome/therapy , Aged , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/transmission , Communicable Disease Control , Facilities and Services Utilization , Female , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Incidence , Italy , Male , Middle Aged , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Retrospective Studies , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/therapy
20.
Eur Heart J Qual Care Clin Outcomes ; 7(3): 238-246, 2021 05 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-691280

ABSTRACT

AIMS: COVID-19 might have affected the care and outcomes of hospitalized acute myocardial infarction (AMI). We aimed to determine whether the COVID-19 pandemic changed patient response, hospital treatment, and mortality from AMI. METHODS AND RESULTS: Admission was classified as non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) or STEMI at 99 hospitals in England through live feeding from the Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project between 1 January 2019 and 22 May 2020. Time series plots were estimated using a 7-day simple moving average, adjusted for seasonality. From 23 March 2020 (UK lockdown), median daily hospitalizations decreased more for NSTEMI [69 to 35; incidence risk ratios (IRR) 0.51, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.47-0.54] than STEMI (35 to 25; IRR 0.74, 95% CI 0.69-0.80) to a nadir on 19 April 2020. During lockdown, patients were younger (mean age 68.7 vs. 66.9 years), less frequently diabetic (24.6% vs. 28.1%), or had cerebrovascular disease (7.0% vs. 8.6%). ST-elevation myocardial infarction more frequently received primary percutaneous coronary intervention (81.8% vs. 78.8%), thrombolysis was negligible (0.5% vs. 0.3%), median admission-to-coronary angiography duration for NSTEMI decreased (26.2 vs. 64.0 h), median duration of hospitalization decreased (4 to 2 days), secondary prevention pharmacotherapy prescription remained unchanged (each > 94.7%). Mortality at 30 days increased for NSTEMI [from 5.4% to 7.5%; odds ratio (OR) 1.41, 95% CI 1.08-1.80], but decreased for STEMI (from 10.2% to 7.7%; OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.54-0.97). CONCLUSION: During COVID-19, there was a substantial decline in admissions with AMI. Those who presented to hospital were younger, less comorbid and, for NSTEMI, had higher 30-day mortality.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction , Aged , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/therapy , Cardiovascular Agents/therapeutic use , Communicable Disease Control/organization & administration , Communicable Disease Control/statistics & numerical data , Coronary Angiography/methods , Coronary Angiography/statistics & numerical data , Coronary Artery Bypass/methods , Coronary Artery Bypass/statistics & numerical data , Female , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Mortality/trends , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/mortality , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/virology , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/methods , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/statistics & numerical data , Registries/statistics & numerical data , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/mortality , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/therapy , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/virology , Seasons , United Kingdom/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL