Impact of COVID-19 on vascular patients worldwide: analysis of the COVIDSurg data.

BACKGROUND: The COVIDSurg collaborative was an international multicenter prospective analysis of perioperative data from 235 hospitals in 24 countries. It found that perioperative COVID-19 infection was associated with a mortality rate of 24%. At the same time, the COVER study demonstrated similarly high perioperative mortality rates in vascular surgical patients undergoing vascular interventions even without COVID-19, likely associated with the high burden of comorbidity associated with vascular patients. This is a vascular subgroup analysis of the COVIDSurg cohort. METHODS: All patients with a suspected or confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 in the 7 days prior to, or in the 30 days following a vascular procedure were included. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes were pulmonary complications (adult respiratory distress syndrome, pulmonary embolism, pneumonia and respiratory failure). Logistic regression was undertaken for dichotomous outcomes. RESULTS: Overall, 602 patients were included in this subgroup analysis, of which 88.4% were emergencies. The most common operations performed were for vascular-related dialysis access procedures (20.1%, N.=121). The combined 30-day mortality rate was 27.2%. Composite secondary pulmonary outcomes occurred in half of the vascular patients (N.=275, 45.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Mortality following vascular surgery in COVID positive patients was significantly higher than levels reported pre-pandemic, and similar to that seen in other specialties in the COVIDSurg cohort. Initiatives and surgical pathways that ensure vascular patients are protected from exposure to COVID-19 in the peri-operative period are vital to protect against excess mortality.

The Australian living guidelines for the clinical care of people with COVID-19: What worked, what didn't and why, a mixed methods process evaluation.

INTRODUCTION: The Australian National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce is producing living, evidence-based, national guidelines for treatment of people with COVID-19 which are updated each week. To continually improve the process and outputs of the Taskforce, and inform future living guideline development, we undertook a concurrent process evaluation examining Taskforce activities and experience of team members and stakeholders during the first 5 months of the project. METHODS: The mixed-methods process evaluation consisted of activity and progress audits, an online survey of all Taskforce participants; and semi-structured interviews with key contributors. Data were collected through five, prospective 4-weekly timepoints (beginning first week of May 2020) and three, fortnightly retrospective timepoints (March 23, April 6 and 20). We collected and analysed quantitative and qualitative data. RESULTS: An updated version of the guidelines was successfully published every week during the process evaluation. The Taskforce formed in March 2020, with a nominal start date of March 23. The first version of the guideline was published two weeks later and included 10 recommendations. By August 24, in the final round of the process evaluation, the team of 11 staff, working with seven guideline panels and over 200 health decision-makers, had developed 66 recommendations addressing 58 topics. The Taskforce website had received over 200,000 page views. Satisfaction with the work of the Taskforce remained very high (>90% extremely or somewhat satisfied) throughout. Several key strengths, challenges and methods questions for the work of the Taskforce were identified. CONCLUSIONS: In just over 5 months of activity, the National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce published 20 weekly updates to the evidence-based national treatment guidelines for COVID-19. This process evaluation identified several factors that enabled this achievement (e.g. an extant skill base in evidence review and convening), along with challenges that needed to be overcome (e.g. managing workloads, structure and governance) and methods questions (pace of updating, and thresholds for inclusion of evidence) which may be useful considerations for other living guidelines projects. An impact evaluation is also being conducted separately to examine awareness, acceptance and use of the guidelines.

The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on aortic valve surgical service: a single centre experience.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus-disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic imposed an unprecedented burden on the provision of cardiac surgical services. The reallocation of workforce and resources necessitated the postponement of elective operations in this cohort of high-risk patients. We investigated the impact of this outbreak on the aortic valve surgery activity at a single two-site centre in the United Kingdom. METHODS: Data were extracted from the local surgical database, including the demographics, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of patients operated on from March 2020 to May 2020 with only one of the two sites resuming operative activity and compared with the respective 2019 period. A similar comparison was conducted with the period between June 2020 and August 2020, when operative activity was restored at both institutional sites. The experience of centres world-wide was invoked to assess the efficiency of our services. RESULTS: There was an initial 38.2% reduction in the total number of operations with a 70% reduction in elective cases, compared with a 159% increase in urgent and emergency operations. The attendant surgical risk was significantly higher [median Euroscore II was 2.7 [1.9-5.2] in 2020 versus 2.1 [0.9-3.7] in 2019 (p = 0.005)] but neither 30-day survival nor freedom from major post-operative complications (re-sternotomy for bleeding/tamponade, transient ischemic attack/stroke, renal replacement therapy) was compromised (p > 0.05 for all comparisons). Recommencement of activity at both institutional sites conferred a surgical volume within 17% of the pre-COVID-19 era. CONCLUSIONS: Our institution managed to offer a considerable volume of aortic valve surgical activity over the first COVID-19 outbreak to a cohort of higher-risk patients, without compromising post-operative outcomes. A backlog of elective cases is expected to develop, the accommodation of which after surgical activity normalisation will be crucial to monitor.

A Meta-Analysis of Prognostic Factors in Patients with Posterior Circulation Stroke after Mechanical Thrombectomy.

BACKGROUND: Posterior circulation stroke is characterized by poor prognosis because its optimal thrombolysis "time window" is always missed. After mechanical thrombectomy (MT), the recanalization rate of posterior circulation obstruction is significantly increased, but prognosis remains poor. To best manage patients, prognostic factors are needed to inform MT triaging after posterior circulation stroke. METHODS: A systematic literature search was done for the period through April 2020. Studies included those with posterior circulation stroke cases that underwent MT. The primary outcome measure in this study was the modified Rankin Scale on day 90. RESULTS: No outcome differences were found in gender, atrial fibrillation, smoking, and coronary artery disease (OR = 1.07, 95% CI: 0.90-1.28; OR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.82-1.26; OR = 1.26, 95% CI: 0.94-1.68; and OR = 0.84, 95% CI: 0.58-1.22, respectively). Hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and previous stroke correlated with poorer prognosis (OR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.48-0.77; OR = 0.60, 95% CI: 0.50-0.73; and OR = 0.74, 95% CI: 0.55-0.99, respectively). However, hyperlipidemia correlated with better prognosis (OR = 1.28, 95% CI: 1.04-1.58). CONCLUSION: Our analysis indicates that hypertension, diabetes mellitus, or previous stroke correlate with poorer outcomes. Intriguingly, hyperlipidemia correlates with better prognosis. These factors may help inform triage decisions when considering MT for posterior circulation stroke patients. However, large, multicenter, randomized controlled trials are needed to validate these observations.

Review of Irish patients meeting ST elevation criteria during the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has seen the introduction of important public health measures to minimise the spread of the virus. We aim to identify the impact government restrictions and hospital-based infection control procedures on ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) care during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Patients meeting ST elevation criteria and undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention from 27 March 2020, the day initial national lockdown measures were announced in Ireland, were included in the study. Patients presenting after the lockdown period, from 18 May to 31 June 2020, were also examined. Time from symptom onset to first medical contact (FMC), transfer time and time of wire cross was noted. Additionally, patient characteristics, left ventricular ejection fraction, mortality and biochemical parameters were documented. Outcomes and characteristics were compared against a control group of patients meeting ST elevation criteria during the month of January. RESULTS: A total of 42 patients presented with STEMI during the lockdown period. A significant increase in total ischaemic time (TIT) was noted versus controls (8.81 hours (±16.4) vs 2.99 hours (±1.39), p=0.03), with increases driven largely by delays in seeking FMC (7.13 hours (±16.4) vs 1.98 hours (±1.46), p=0.049). TIT remained significantly elevated during the postlockdown period (6.1 hours (±5.3), p=0.05), however, an improvement in patient delays was seen versus the control group (3.99 hours (±4.5), p=0.06). There was no difference seen in transfer times and door to wire cross time during lockdown, however, a significant increase in transfer times was seen postlockdown versus controls (1.81 hours (±1.0) vs 1.1 hours (±0.87), p=0.004). CONCLUSION: A significant increase in TIT was seen during the lockdown period driven mainly by patient factors highlighting the significance of public health messages on public perception. Additionally, a significant delay in transfer times to our centre was seen postlockdown.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Acute Stroke Care, Time Metrics, Outcomes, and Racial Disparities in a Southeast Michigan Health System.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has impacted acute stroke care with several reports showing worldwide drops in stroke caseload during the pandemic. We studied the impact of COVID-19 on acute stroke care in our health system serving Southeast Michigan as we rolled out a policy to limit admissions and transfers. METHODS: in this retrospective study conducted at two stroke centers, we included consecutive patients presenting to the ED for whom a stroke alert was activated during the period extending from 3/20/20 to 5/20/20 and a similar period in 2019. We compared demographics, time metrics, and discharge outcomes between the two groups. RESULTS: of 385 patients presented to the ED during the two time periods, 58% were African American. There was a significant decrease in the number of stroke patients presenting to the ED and admitted to the hospital between the two periods (p <0.001). In 2020, patients had higher presenting NIHSS (median: 2 vs 5, p = 0.012), discharge NIHSS (median: 2 vs 3, p = 0.004), and longer times from LKW to ED arrival (4.8 vs 9.4 h, p = 0.031) and stroke team activation (median: 10 vs 15 min, p = 0.006). In 2020, stroke mimics rates were lower among African Americans. There were fewer hospitalizations (p <0.001), and transfers from outside facilities (p = 0.015). CONCLUSION: a trend toward faster stroke care in the ED was observed during the pandemic along with dramatically reduced numbers of ED visits, hospitalizations and stroke mimics. Delayed ED presentations and higher stroke severity characterized the African American population, highlighting deepening of racial disparities during the pandemic.

Patient Characteristics and Outcomes Associated with Decline in Stroke Volumes During the Early COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Delayed evaluation of stroke may contribute to COVID-19 pandemic-related morbidity and mortality. This study evaluated patient characteristics, process measures and outcomes associated with the decline in stroke presentation during the early pandemic. METHODS: Volumes of stroke presentations, intravenous thrombolytic administrations, and mechanical thrombectomies from 52 hospitals from January 1-June 30, 2020 were analyzed with piecewise linear regression and linear spline models. Univariate analysis compared pandemic (case) and pre-pandemic (control) groups defined in relation to the nadir of daily strokes during the study period. Significantly different patient characteristics were further evaluated with logistic regression, and significantly different process measures and outcomes were re-analyzed after propensity score matching. RESULTS: Analysis of 7,389 patients found daily stroke volumes decreased 0.91/day from March 12-26 (p < 0.0001), reaching a nadir 35.0% less than expected, and increased 0.15 strokes/day from March 27-June 23, 2020 (p < 0.0001). Intravenous thrombolytic administrations decreased 3.3/week from February 19-March 31 (p = 0.0023), reaching a nadir 33.4% less than expected, and increased 1.4 administrations/week from April 1-June 23 (p < 0.0001). Mechanical thrombectomy volumes decreased by 1.5/week from February 19-March 31, 2020 (p = 0.0039), reaching a nadir 11.3% less than expected. The pandemic group was more likely to ambulate independently at baseline (p = 0.02, OR = 1.60, 95% CI = 1.08-2.42), and less likely to present with mild stroke symptoms (NIH Stroke Scale ≤ 5; p = 0.04, OR = 1.01, 95% CI = 1.00-1.02). Process measures and outcomes of each group did not differ, including door-to-needle time, door-to-puncture time, and successful mechanical thrombectomy rate. CONCLUSION: Stroke presentations and acute interventions decreased during the early COVID-19 pandemic, at least in part due to patients with lower baseline functional status and milder symptoms not seeking medical care. Public health messaging and initiatives should target these populations.

In-Hospital Management and Outcomes of Acute Myocardial Infarction Before and During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic.

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.

Stroke Care Trends During COVID-19 Pandemic in Zanjan Province, Iran. From the CASCADE Initiative: Statistical Analysis Plan and Preliminary Results.

BACKGROUND: The emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted global healthcare systems and this may affect stroke care and outcomes. This study examines the changes in stroke epidemiology and care during the COVID-19 pandemic in Zanjan Province, Iran. METHODS: This study is part of the CASCADE international initiative. From February 18, 2019, to July 18, 2020, we followed ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke hospitalization rates and outcomes in Valiasr Hospital, Zanjan, Iran. We used a Bayesian hierarchical model and an interrupted time series analysis (ITS) to identify changes in stroke hospitalization rate, baseline stroke severity [measured by the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS)], disability [measured by the modified Rankin Scale (mRS)], presentation time (last seen normal to hospital presentation), thrombolytic therapy rate, median door-to-needle time, length of hospital stay, and in-hospital mortality. We compared in-hospital mortality between study periods using Cox-regression model. RESULTS: During the study period, 1,026 stroke patients were hospitalized. Stroke hospitalization rates per 100,000 population decreased from 68.09 before the pandemic to 44.50 during the pandemic, with a significant decline in both Bayesian [Beta: -1.034; Standard Error (SE): 0.22, 95% CrI: -1.48, -0.59] and ITS analysis (estimate: -1.03, SE = 0.24, p < 0.0001). Furthermore, we observed lower admission rates for patients with mild (NIHSS < 5) ischemic stroke (p < 0.0001). Although, the presentation time and door-to-needle time did not change during the pandemic, a lower proportion of patients received thrombolysis (-10.1%; p = 0.004). We did not see significant changes in admission rate to the stroke unit and in-hospital mortality rate; however, disability at discharge increased (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: In Zanjan, Iran, the COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted stroke outcomes and altered the delivery of stroke care. Observed lower admission rates for milder stroke may possibly be due to fear of exposure related to COVID-19. The decrease in patients treated with thrombolysis and the increased disability at discharge may indicate changes in the delivery of stroke care and increased pressure on existing stroke acute and subacute services. The results of this research will contribute to a similar analysis of the larger CASCADE dataset in order to confirm findings at a global scale and improve measures to ensure the best quality of care for stroke patients during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The impact of COVID-19 on acute ischemic stroke admissions: Analysis from a community-based tertiary care center.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on hospital admissions and outcomes in patients admitted with acute ischemic stroke. METHODS: Single-center retrospective analysis of patients admitted to the hospital with acute ischemic stroke, between December 1st, 2019 and June 30th, 2020. Outcomes were classified as none-to-minimal disability, moderate-to-severe disability, and death based on discharge disposition, and compared between two time periods: pre-COVID-19 era (December 1st, 2019 to March 11th, 2020) and COVID-19 era (March 12th to June 30th, 2020). We also performed a comparative trend analysis for the equivalent period between 2019 and 2020. RESULTS: Five hundred and seventy-five patients with a mean age (years±SD) of 68±16 were admitted from December 1st, 2019 to June 30th, 2020, with a clinical diagnosis of acute ischemic stroke. Of these, 255 (44.3%) patients were admitted during the COVID-19 era. We observed a 22.1% and 39.5% decline in admission for acute ischemic stroke in April and May 2020, respectively. A significantly higher percentage of patients with acute ischemic stroke received intravenous thrombolysis during the COVID-19 era (p = 0.020). In patients with confirmed COVID-19, we found a higher percentage of older men with preexisting comorbidities such as hyperlipidemia, coronary artery disease, and diabetes mellitus but a lower rate of atrial fibrillation. In addition, we found a treatment delay in both intravenous thrombolysis (median 94.5 min versus 38 min) and mechanical thrombectomy (median 244 min versus 86 min) in patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection. There were no differences in patients' disposition including home, short-term, and long-term facility (p = 0.60). CONCLUSIONS: We observed a reduction of hospital admissions in acute ischemic strokes and some delay in reperfusion therapy during the COVID-19 pandemic. Prospective studies and a larger dataset analysis are warranted.

Implementation of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Japan　- Nationwide Survey Report of the Japanese Association of Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics for Cardiovascular Disease.

BACKGROUND: With the rapid spread of COVID-19, hospitals providing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were placed in unique and unfamiliar circumstances. This study evaluated variations in the treatment of coronary artery disease according to time course of the COVID-19 pandemic in Japan.Methods and Results:The Japanese Association of Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics performed serial surveys during the pandemic (in mid-April, late-April and mid-May 2020) with queries regarding the implementation of PCI. Hospitals were asked about their treatment strategies for elective PCI and emergency PCI for ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and high-risk acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients. Most hospitals opted to perform primary PCI in the usual manner at the beginning of the pandemic. As the pandemic progressed, hospitals in the 7 populated areas downgraded the performance of PCI for chronic coronary syndrome and high-risk ACS, but not for STEMI patients. After the state of emergency was lifted in most prefectures in mid-May, the rate of PCI gradually normalized. Screening tests, such as polymerase chain reaction and chest computed tomography, in ACS were frequently used. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic greatly affected PCI treatment in Japan. However, even in the most critical situations during the pandemic, most institutions continued to perform primary PCI normally for STEMI patients.

Clinical and procedural characteristics of COVID-19 patients treated with percutaneous coronary interventions.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 pandemic has affected healthcare systems worldwide. Resources are being shifted and potentially jeopardize safety of non-COVID-19 patients with comorbidities. Our aim was to investigate the impact of national lockdown and SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on percutaneous treatment of coronary artery disease in Poland. METHODS: Data on patients who underwent percutaneous coronary procedures (angiography and/or percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI]) were extracted for March 13-May 13, 2020 from a national PCI database (ORPKI Registry) during the first month of national lockdown and compared with analogous time period in 2019. RESULTS: Of 163 cardiac catheterization centers in Poland, 15 (9.2%) were indefinitely or temporarily closed down due to SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. There were nine physicians (9 of 544; 1.7%) who were infected with SARS-CoV-2. There were 13,750 interventional cardiology procedures performed in Poland in the analyzed time period. In 66% of cases an acute coronary syndrome was diagnosed, and in the remaining 34% it was an elective procedure for the chronic coronary syndrome in comparison to 50% in 2019 (p < .001). There were 362 patients (2.6% of all) with COVID-19 confirmed/suspected who were treated in interventional cardiology centers and 145 with ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI) diagnosis (6% of all STEMIs). CONCLUSIONS: Due to SARS-CoV-2 pandemic there was an absolute reduction in the number of interventional procedures both acute and elective in comparison to 2019 and a significant shift into acute procedures. COVID-19 confirmed/suspected patients do not differ in terms of procedural and baseline characteristics and reveal similar outcomes when treated with percutaneous coronary interventions.

Impact of COVID-19 outbreak on regional STEMI care in Germany.

AIMS: To assess the impact of the lockdown due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on key quality indicators for the treatment of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients. METHODS: Data were obtained from 41 hospitals participating in the prospective Feedback Intervention and Treatment Times in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (FITT-STEMI) study, including 15,800 patients treated for acute STEMI from January 2017 to the end of March 2020. RESULTS: There was a 12.6% decrease in the total number of STEMI patients treated at the peak of the pandemic in March 2020 as compared to the mean number treated in the March months of the preceding years. This was accompanied by a significant difference among the modes of admission to hospitals (p = 0.017) with a particular decline in intra-hospital infarctions and transfer patients from other hospitals, while the proportion of patients transported by emergency medical service (EMS) remained stable. In EMS-transported patients, predefined quality indicators, such as percentages of pre-hospital ECGs (both 97%, 95% CI = - 2.2-2.7, p = 0.846), direct transports from the scene to the catheterization laboratory bypassing the emergency department (68% vs. 66%, 95% CI = - 4.9-7.9, p = 0.641), and contact-to-balloon-times of less than or equal to 90 min (58.3% vs. 57.8%, 95%CI = - 6.2-7.2, p = 0.879) were not significantly altered during the COVID-19 crisis, as was in-hospital mortality (9.2% vs. 8.5%, 95% CI = - 3.2-4.5, p = 0.739). CONCLUSIONS: Clinically important indicators for STEMI management were unaffected at the peak of COVID-19, suggesting that the pre-existing logistic structure in the regional STEMI networks preserved high-quality standards even when challenged by a threatening pandemic. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00794001.