Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 22
Filter
1.
J Am Heart Assoc ; 11(6): e022625, 2022 03 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1770080

ABSTRACT

Background Excess mortality from cardiovascular disease during the COVID-19 pandemic has been reported. The mechanism is unclear but may include delay or deferral of care, or differential treatment during hospitalization because of strains on hospital capacity. Methods and Results We used emergency department and inpatient data from a 12-hospital health system to examine changes in volume, patient age and comorbidities, treatment (right- and left-heart catheterization), and outcomes for patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and heart failure (HF) during the COVID-19 pandemic compared with pre-COVID-19 (2018 and 2019), controlling for seasonal variation. We analyzed 27 427 emergency department visits or hospitalizations. Patient volume decreased during COVID-19 for both HF and AMI, but age, race, sex, and medical comorbidities were similar before and during COVID-19 for both groups. Acuity increased for AMI as measured by the proportion of patients with ST-segment elevation. There were no differences in right-heart catheterization for patients with HF or in left heart catheterization for patients with AMI. In-hospital mortality increased for AMI during COVID-19 (odds ratio [OR], 1.46; 95% CI, 1.21-1.76), particularly among the ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction subgroup (OR, 2.57; 95% CI, 2.24-2.96), but was unchanged for HF (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.89-1.16). Conclusions Cardiovascular volume decreased during COVID-19. Despite similar patient age and comorbidities and in-hospital treatments during COVID-19, mortality increased for patients with AMI but not patients with HF. Given that AMI is a time-sensitive condition, delay or deferral of care rather than changes in hospital care delivery may have led to worse cardiovascular outcomes during COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/psychology , Heart Failure , Myocardial Infarction , COVID-19/epidemiology , Heart Failure/epidemiology , Heart Failure/etiology , Heart Failure/therapy , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Missouri , Myocardial Infarction/mortality , Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Pandemics , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/mortality , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/therapy
2.
N Engl J Med ; 385(20): 1845-1855, 2021 11 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1510679

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In patients with symptomatic heart failure, sacubitril-valsartan has been found to reduce the risk of hospitalization and death from cardiovascular causes more effectively than an angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor. Trials comparing the effects of these drugs in patients with acute myocardial infarction have been lacking. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with myocardial infarction complicated by a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction, pulmonary congestion, or both to receive either sacubitril-valsartan (97 mg of sacubitril and 103 mg of valsartan twice daily) or ramipril (5 mg twice daily) in addition to recommended therapy. The primary outcome was death from cardiovascular causes or incident heart failure (outpatient symptomatic heart failure or heart failure leading to hospitalization), whichever occurred first. RESULTS: A total of 5661 patients underwent randomization; 2830 were assigned to receive sacubitril-valsartan and 2831 to receive ramipril. Over a median of 22 months, a primary-outcome event occurred in 338 patients (11.9%) in the sacubitril-valsartan group and in 373 patients (13.2%) in the ramipril group (hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.78 to 1.04; P = 0.17). Death from cardiovascular causes or hospitalization for heart failure occurred in 308 patients (10.9%) in the sacubitril-valsartan group and in 335 patients (11.8%) in the ramipril group (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.07); death from cardiovascular causes in 168 (5.9%) and 191 (6.7%), respectively (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.71 to 1.08); and death from any cause in 213 (7.5%) and 242 (8.5%), respectively (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.05). Treatment was discontinued because of an adverse event in 357 patients (12.6%) in the sacubitril-valsartan group and 379 patients (13.4%) in the ramipril group. CONCLUSIONS: Sacubitril-valsartan was not associated with a significantly lower incidence of death from cardiovascular causes or incident heart failure than ramipril among patients with acute myocardial infarction. (Funded by Novartis; PARADISE-MI ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02924727.).


Subject(s)
Aminobutyrates/therapeutic use , Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists/therapeutic use , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Biphenyl Compounds/therapeutic use , Heart Failure/prevention & control , Myocardial Infarction/drug therapy , Ramipril/therapeutic use , Valsartan/therapeutic use , Aged , Aminobutyrates/adverse effects , Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists/adverse effects , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors/adverse effects , Biphenyl Compounds/adverse effects , Cardiovascular Diseases/mortality , Double-Blind Method , Drug Combinations , Female , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Hypotension/chemically induced , Male , Middle Aged , Myocardial Infarction/complications , Myocardial Infarction/mortality , Proportional Hazards Models , Ramipril/adverse effects , Stroke Volume , Valsartan/adverse effects , Ventricular Dysfunction, Left/etiology
3.
Hamostaseologie ; 41(5): 356-364, 2021 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1483185

ABSTRACT

Cardiovascular manifestations are frequent in COVID-19 infection and are predictive of adverse outcomes. Elevated cardiac biomarkers are common findings in patients with cardiovascular comorbidities and severe COVID-19 infection. Troponin, inflammatory and thrombotic markers may also improve risk prediction in COVID-19. In our comprehensive review, we provide an overview of the incidence, potential mechanisms and outcome of acute cardiac injury in COVID-19. Thereby, we discuss coagulation abnormalities in sepsis and altered immune response as contributing factors favoring myocardial injury. We further highlight the role of endothelial damage in the pathophysiological concepts. Finally, observational studies addressing the incidence of myocardial infarction during COVID-19 pandemic are discussed.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Heart Injuries/epidemiology , Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Biomarkers/blood , COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/mortality , Comorbidity , Heart Injuries/blood , Heart Injuries/mortality , Humans , Incidence , Models, Cardiovascular , Myocardial Infarction/blood , Myocardial Infarction/mortality , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Troponin/blood
4.
PLoS One ; 16(10): e0257910, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1448575

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The first Covid-19 epidemic outbreak has enormously impacted the delivery of clinical healthcare and hospital management practices in most of the hospitals around the world. In this context, it is important to assess whether the clinical management of non-Covid patients has not been compromised. Among non-Covid cases, patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction (AMI) and stroke need non-deferrable emergency care and are the natural candidates to be studied. Preliminary evidence suggests that the time from onset of symptoms to emergency department (ED) presentation has significantly increased in Covid-19 times as well as the 30-day mortality and in-hospital mortality. METHODS: We check, in a causal inference framework, the causal effect of the hospital's stress generated by Covid-19 pandemic on in-hospital mortality rates (primary end-point of the study) of AMI and stroke over several time-windows of 15-days around the implementation date of the State of Emergency restrictions for COVID-19 (March, 9th 2020) using two quasi-experimental approaches, regression-discontinuity design (RDD) and difference-in-regression-discontinuity (DRD) designs. Data are drawn from Spedali Civili of Brescia, one of the most hit provinces in Italy by Covid-19 during March and May 2020. FINDINGS: Despite the potential adverse effects on expected mortality due to a longer time to hospitalization and staff extra-burden generated by the first wave of Covid-19, the AMI and stroke mortality rates are overall not statistically different during the first wave of Covid-19 than before the first peak. The obtained results provided by RDD models are robust also when we account for seasonality and unobserved factors with DRD models. INTERPRETATION: The non-statistically significant impact on mortality rates for AMI and stroke patients provides evidence of the hospital ability to manage -with the implementation of a dual track organization- the simultaneous delivery of high-quality cares to both Covid and non-Covid patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/pathology , Myocardial Infarction/mortality , Stroke/mortality , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Databases, Factual , Emergency Medical Services , Hospital Mortality , Hospitalization , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Myocardial Infarction/pathology , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Stroke/pathology
5.
Eur Heart J Qual Care Clin Outcomes ; 7(5): 438-446, 2021 09 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1377964

ABSTRACT

AIMS: To evaluate the acute and chronic patterns of myocardial injury among patients with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), and their mid-term outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 who had a hospital encounter within the Mount Sinai Health System (New York City) between 27 February 2020 and 15 October 2020 were evaluated for inclusion. Troponin levels assessed between 72 h before and 48 h after the COVID-19 diagnosis were used to stratify the study population by the presence of acute and chronic myocardial injury, as defined by the Fourth Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction. Among 4695 patients, those with chronic myocardial injury (n = 319, 6.8%) had more comorbidities, including chronic kidney disease and heart failure, while acute myocardial injury (n = 1168, 24.9%) was more associated with increased levels of inflammatory markers. Both types of myocardial injury were strongly associated with impaired survival at 6 months [chronic: hazard ratio (HR) 4.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.44-5.06; acute: HR 4.72, 95% CI 4.14-5.36], even after excluding events occurring in the first 30 days (chronic: HR 3.97, 95% CI 2.15-7.33; acute: HR 4.13, 95% CI 2.75-6.21). The mortality risk was not significantly different in patients with acute as compared with chronic myocardial injury (HR 1.13, 95% CI 0.94-1.36), except for a worse prognostic impact of acute myocardial injury in patients <65 years of age (P-interaction = 0.043) and in those without coronary artery disease (P-interaction = 0.041). CONCLUSION: Chronic and acute myocardial injury represent two distinctive patterns of cardiac involvement among COVID-19 patients. While both types of myocardial injury are associated with impaired survival at 6 months, mortality rates peak in the early phase of the infection but remain elevated even beyond 30 days during the convalescent phase.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Myocardial Infarction/blood , Myocardial Infarction/etiology , Troponin/analysis , Acute Disease/epidemiology , Acute Disease/mortality , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Chronic Disease/epidemiology , Chronic Disease/mortality , Comorbidity , Coronary Artery Disease/epidemiology , Coronary Artery Disease/mortality , Female , Heart Failure/epidemiology , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Mortality/trends , Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , Myocardial Infarction/mortality , New York City/epidemiology , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Prognosis , Renal Insufficiency, Chronic/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/genetics
6.
Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique ; 69(5): 247-254, 2021 Oct.
Article in French | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1336882

ABSTRACT

POSITION DU PROBLèME: Le confinement mis en place au deuxième trimestre 2020 a entrainé une amélioration de la qualité de l'air de Santiago, capitale et plus grande ville du Chili, caractérisée par de fortes concentrations en particules fines PM2,5 liées, en grande partie, au trafic routier. L'objectif était de mettre en évidence une potentielle réduction des visites aux urgences pour infarctus du myocarde aigu (IDM) et des décès dus à une cardiopathie ischémique (CPI) attribuable à l'émission de PM2,5, en comparant les périodes équivalentes de 2019 et de 2020. MéTHODES: À Santiago, la surveillance de la qualité de l'air se fait grâce à neuf moniteurs situés dans neuf communes différentes : Cerro Navia, Cerrillos, El Bosque, Pudahuel, Independencia, La Florida, Quilicura, Santiago centre-ville et Las Condes (classées de la plus haute à la plus basse en matière de pauvreté multidimensionnelle). La concentration moyenne quotidienne de PM2,5 a été décrite avec des séries temporelles, et les visites aux urgences pour IDM et les décès dus à une CPI ont été analysés de façon trimestrielle pour chaque année. Pour estimer l'impact de l'excès de PM2,5, les fractions de risque attribuables (FRA) pour les visites aux urgences pour IDM et les décès pour CPI ont été calculées. RéSULTATS: La moyenne quotidienne des PM2,5 a diminué dans huit des neuf communes de Santiago. Cependant, la réduction n'a été significative que dans trois communes. Les visites aux urgences pour IDM et les décès par CPI attribuables aux PM2,5 ont diminué légèrement mais significativement dans ces trois communes. Les FRA dans les autres communes sont restées similaires à 2019. CONCLUSIONS: Une réduction significative de la FRA des PM2,5 pour les décès par CPI et les visites aux urgences d'IDM n'a été observée que dans les communes avec une réduction significative de la concentration quotidienne moyenne de PM2,5 pendant la pandémie de COVID-19.


Subject(s)
Air Pollution/adverse effects , COVID-19/epidemiology , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Myocardial Ischemia/mortality , Chile , Cities , Humans , Myocardial Infarction/mortality , Pandemics , Particulate Matter/adverse effects
7.
Turk Kardiyol Dern Ars ; 49(4): 293-302, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1262652

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Acute ischemic cardiac events can complicate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We report the in-hospital characteristics of patients with acute myocardial infarction and concomitant COVID-19. METHODS: This was a registry-based retrospective analysis of patients admitted with positive COVID-19 tests who suffered acute myocardial infarction either before or during hospitalization; from 1 March 2020 to 1 April 2020 in a tertiary cardiovascular center-Tehran Heart Center. We performed an exploratory analysis to compare the clinical characteristics of patients who died during hospitalization or were discharged alive. RESULTS: In March 2020, 57 patients who had acute myocardial infarction and a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 were included in the study. During hospitalization, 13 patients (22.8%) died after a mean hospital stay of 8.4 days. The deceased were older than the survivors. No significant association between mortality and sex or length of hospital stay was observed. Hypertensive individuals were more likely to have a fatal outcome. Previously receiving angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II receptor blockers did not show any association with mortality. Regarding the laboratory data during hospitalization, higher cardiac troponin T, neutrophil count, C-reactive protein, urea, and blood urea nitrogen/creatinine ratio were observed in the mortality group. The deceased had a lower lymphocyte count than the survivors. CONCLUSIONS: Markers of worsening renal function and immune system disturbance seem to be associated with mortality in concurrent acute myocardial infarction and COVID-19. Optimizing the management of acute coronary syndrome complicating COVID-19 requires addressing such potential contributors to mortality.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Myocardial Infarction , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/mortality , Female , Humans , Length of Stay/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Myocardial Infarction/complications , Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , Myocardial Infarction/mortality , Retrospective Studies
8.
Platelets ; 32(8): 1009-1017, 2021 Nov 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1258665

ABSTRACT

Platelets may be a target of bacteria and viruses, which can directly or indirectly activate them so promoting thrombosis. In accordance with this, community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is complicated by ischemia-related vascular disease (myocardial infarction and stroke) in roughly 10% of patients while the incidence of venous thrombosis is uncertain. In CAP platelet biosynthesis of TxA2 is augmented and associated with myocardial infarction; however, a cause-effect relationship is still unclear as unclear is if platelet activation promotes thrombosis or functional changes of coronary tree such vasospasm. Retrospective studies suggested a potential role of aspirin in reducing mortality but the impact on vascular disease is still unknown. Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is complicated by thrombosis in roughly 20% of patients with an almost equivalent localization in arterial and venous circulation. Platelet activation seems to have a pivot role in the thrombotic process in Covid-19 as consistently evidenced by its involvement in promoting Tissue Factor up-regulation via leucocyte interaction. Until now, antiplatelet treatment has been scarcely considered for the treatment of Covid-19; interventional trials, however, are in progress to explore this issue. The aim of this review is 1) to compare the type of vascular diseases complicating CAP and Covid-19 2) to assess the different role of platelets in both diseases and 3) to discuss if antiplatelet treatment is potentially useful to improve clinical outcomes.


Subject(s)
Aspirin/therapeutic use , Blood Platelets/metabolism , COVID-19 , Myocardial Infarction , SARS-CoV-2/metabolism , Stroke , Thrombosis , COVID-19/drug therapy , COVID-19/metabolism , COVID-19/mortality , Humans , Myocardial Infarction/drug therapy , Myocardial Infarction/metabolism , Myocardial Infarction/mortality , Stroke/drug therapy , Stroke/metabolism , Stroke/mortality , Thrombosis/drug therapy , Thrombosis/metabolism , Thrombosis/mortality
9.
Sci Rep ; 11(1): 9959, 2021 05 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1225515

ABSTRACT

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a global pandemic impacting nearly 170 countries/regions and millions of patients worldwide. Patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) still need to be treated at percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) centers with relevant safety measures. This retrospective study was conducted to assess the therapeutic outcomes of PCI performed under the safety measures and normal conditions. AMI patients undergoing PCI between January 24 to April 30, 2020 were performed under safety measures for COVID-19. Patients received pulmonary computed tomography (CT) and underwent PCI in negative pressure ICU. Cardiac catheterization laboratory (CCL) staff and physicians worked with level III personal protection. Demographic and clinical data, such as door-to-balloon (DTB) time, operation time, complications for patients in this period (COVID-19 group) and the same period in 2019 (2019 group) were retrieved and analyzed. COVID-19 and 2019 groups had 37 and 96 patients, respectively. There was no significant difference in age, gender, BMI and comorbidity between the two groups. DTB time and operation time were similar between the two groups (60.0 ± 12.39 vs 58.83 ± 12.85 min, p = 0.636; 61.46 ± 9.91 vs 62.55 ± 10.72 min, p = 0.592). Hospital stay time in COVID-19 group was significantly shorter (6.78 ± 2.14 vs 8.85 ± 2.64 days, p < 0.001). The incidences of malignant arrhythmia and Takotsubo Syndrome in COVID-19 group were higher than 2019 group significantly (16.22% vs 5.21%, p = 0.039; 10.81% vs 1.04% p = 0.008). During hospitalization and 3-month follow-up, the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events and mortality in the two groups were statistically similar (35.13% vs 14.58%, p = 0.094; 16.22% vs 8.33%, p = 0.184). The risk of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) was associated with cardiogenic shock (OR, 11.53; 95% CI, 2.888-46.036; p = 0.001), malignant arrhythmias (OR, 7.176; 95% CI, 1.893-27.203; p = 0.004) and advanced age (≥ 75 years) (OR, 6.718; 95% CI, 1.738-25.964; p = 0.006). Cardiogenic shock (OR, 17.663; 95% CI, 5.5-56.762; p < 0.001) and malignant arrhythmias (OR, 4.659; 95% CI, 1.481-14.653; p = 0.008) were also associated with death of 3 months. Our analysis showed that safety measures undertaken in this hospital, including screening of COVID-19 infection and use of personal protection equipment for conducting PCI did not compromise the surgical outcome as compared with PCI under normal condition, although there were slight increases in incidence of malignant arrhythmia and Takotsubo Syndrome.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/pathology , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , Treatment Outcome , Age Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Arrhythmias, Cardiac/epidemiology , Arrhythmias, Cardiac/etiology , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/transmission , COVID-19/virology , Female , Humans , Incidence , Kaplan-Meier Estimate , Length of Stay , Male , Middle Aged , Myocardial Infarction/complications , Myocardial Infarction/mortality , Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/adverse effects , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Shock, Cardiogenic/epidemiology , Shock, Cardiogenic/etiology , Takotsubo Cardiomyopathy/epidemiology , Takotsubo Cardiomyopathy/etiology
10.
J Am Geriatr Soc ; 69(7): 1713-1721, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1218150

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Emergency department (ED) visits have declined while excess mortality, not attributable to COVID-19, has grown. It is not known whether older adults are accessing emergency care differently from their younger counterparts. Our objective was to determine patterns of ED visit counts for emergent conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic for older adults. DESIGN: Retrospective, observational study. SETTING: Observational analysis of ED sites enrolled in a national clinical quality registry. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred and sixty-four ED sites in 33 states from January 1, 2019 to November 15, 2020. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES: We measured daily ED visit counts for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), stroke, sepsis, fall, and hip fracture, as well as deaths in the ED, by age categories. We estimated Poisson regression models comparing early and post-early pandemic periods (defined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) to the pre-pandemic period. We report incident rate ratios to summarize changes in visit incidence. RESULTS: For AMI, stroke, and sepsis, the older (75-84) and oldest old (85+ years) had the greatest decline in visit counts initially and the smallest recovery in the post-early pandemic periods. For falls, visits declined early and partially recovered uniformly across age categories. In contrast, hip fractures exhibited less change in visit rates across time periods. Deaths in the ED increased during the early pandemic period, but then fell and were persistently lower than baseline, especially for the older (75-84) and oldest old (85+ years). CONCLUSIONS: The decline in ED visits for emergent conditions among older adults has been more pronounced and persistent than for younger patients, with fewer deaths in the ED. This is concerning given the greater prevalence and risk of poor outcomes for emergent conditions in this age group that are amenable to time-sensitive ED diagnosis and treatment, and may in part explain excess mortality during the COVID-19 era among older adults.


Subject(s)
Accidental Falls/statistics & numerical data , Aging , COVID-19/epidemiology , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Myocardial Infarction , Sepsis , Stroke , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Aging/physiology , Aging/psychology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Emergencies/epidemiology , Emergency Medical Services/methods , Emergency Medical Services/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Mortality , Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , Myocardial Infarction/mortality , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2 , Sepsis/diagnosis , Sepsis/mortality , Stroke/diagnosis , Stroke/mortality , United States/epidemiology
11.
J Cardiovasc Pharmacol Ther ; 26(5): 399-414, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1216874

ABSTRACT

In the era of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, acute cardiac injury (ACI), as reflected by elevated cardiac troponin above the 99th percentile, has been observed in 8%-62% of patients with COVID-19 infection with highest incidence and mortality recorded in patients with severe infection. Apart from the clinically and electrocardiographically discernible causes of ACI, such as acute myocardial infarction (MI), other cardiac causes need to be considered such as myocarditis, Takotsubo syndrome, and direct injury from COVID-19, together with noncardiac conditions, such as pulmonary embolism, critical illness, and sepsis. Acute coronary syndromes (ACS) with normal or near-normal coronary arteries (ACS-NNOCA) appear to have a higher prevalence in both COVID-19 positive and negative patients in the pandemic compared to the pre-pandemic era. Echocardiography, coronary angiography, chest computed tomography and/or cardiac magnetic resonance imaging may render a correct diagnosis, obviating the need for endomyocardial biopsy. Importantly, a significant delay has been recorded in patients with ACS seeking advice for their symptoms, while their routine care has been sharply disrupted with fewer urgent coronary angiographies and/or primary percutaneous coronary interventions performed in the case of ST-elevation MI (STEMI) with an inappropriate shift toward thrombolysis, all contributing to a higher complication rate in these patients. Thus, new challenges have emerged in rendering a diagnosis and delivering treatment in patients with ACI/ACS in the pandemic era. These issues, the various mechanisms involved in the development of ACI/ACS, and relevant current guidelines are herein reviewed.


Subject(s)
Acute Coronary Syndrome/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , Acute Coronary Syndrome/diagnostic imaging , Acute Coronary Syndrome/mortality , Age Factors , COVID-19/mortality , Cardiac Imaging Techniques , Diagnosis, Differential , Heart Diseases/diagnostic imaging , Heart Diseases/epidemiology , Humans , Inflammation Mediators/metabolism , Myocardial Infarction/diagnostic imaging , Myocardial Infarction/mortality , SARS-CoV-2 , Sex Factors , Stress, Psychological/epidemiology , Time-to-Treatment , Troponin I/blood
13.
Heart Vessels ; 36(10): 1474-1483, 2021 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1141415

ABSTRACT

There are a few Japanese data regarding the incidence and outcomes of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) after the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak. We retrospectively reviewed the data of AMI patients admitted to the Nihon University Itabashi Hospital after a COVID-19 outbreak in 2020 (COVID-19 period) and the same period from 2017 to 2019 (control period). The patients' characteristics, time course of admission, diagnosis, and treatment of AMI, and 30-day mortality were compared between the two period-groups for both ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-STEMI (NSTEMI), respectively. The AMI inpatients decreased by 5.7% after the COVID-19 outbreak. There were no differences among most patient backgrounds between the two-period groups. For NSTEMI, the time from the symptom onset to admission was significantly longer, and that from the AMI diagnosis to the catheter examination tended to be longer during the COVID-19 period than the control period, but not for STEMI. The 30-day mortality was significantly higher during the COVID-19 period for NSTEMI (23.1% vs. 1.9%, P = 0.004), but not for STEMI (9.4% vs. 8.3%, P = 0.77). In conclusion, hospitalizations for AMI decreased after the COVID-19 outbreak. Acute cardiac care for STEMI and the associated outcome did not change, but NSTEMI outcome worsened after the COVID-19 outbreak, which may have been associated with delayed medical treatment due to the indirect impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Coronary Angiography/trends , Hospitalization/trends , Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/trends , Time-to-Treatment/trends , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Hospital Mortality/trends , Humans , Incidence , Japan/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Myocardial Infarction/diagnostic imaging , Myocardial Infarction/mortality , Patient Acceptance of Health Care , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
14.
ESC Heart Fail ; 8(1): 333-343, 2021 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1064348

ABSTRACT

AIMS: This study aimed to evaluate the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) outbreak on admissions for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and related mortality, severity of presentation, major cardiac complications and outcome in a tertiary-care university hospital in Berlin, Germany. METHODS AND RESULTS: In a single-centre cross-sectional observational study, we included 355 patients with AMI containing ST-elevation or non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI or NSTEMI), admitted for emergency cardiac catheterization between January and April 2020 and the equivalent time in 2019. During the early phase of the Covid-19 pandemic (e-COV) in Berlin (March and April 2020), admissions for AMI halved compared with those in the pre-Covid-19 time (January and February 2020; pre-COV) and with those in the corresponding months in 2019. However, mortality for AMI increased substantially from 5.2% pre-COV to 17.7% (P < 0.05) during e-COV. Severity of presentation for AMI was more pronounced during e-COV [increased levels of cardiac enzymes, reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), an increase in the need of inotropic support by 25% (P < 0.01)], while patients' demographic and angiographic characteristics did not differ between pre-COV and e-COV. Time from symptom onset to first medical contact was prolonged in all AMI during e-COV (presentation > 72 h +21% in STEMI, p = 0.04 and presentation > 72 h in NSTEMI +22%, p = 0.02). Door to balloon time was similar in STEMI patients, while time from first medical contact to revascularization was significantly delayed in NSTEMI patients (p = 0.02). Major cardiac complications after AMI occurred significantly more often, and cardiac recovery was worse in e-COV than in pre-COV, demonstrated by a significantly lower LVEF (39 ± 16 vs. 46 ± 16, p < 0.05) at hospital discharge and substantially higher NTproBNP levels. CONCLUSIONS: The Covid-19 outbreak affects hospital admissions for acute coronary syndromes. During the first phase of the pandemia, significantly less patients with AMI were admitted, but those admitted presented with a more severe phenotype and had a higher mortality, more complications, and a worse short-term outcome. Therefore, our data indicate that Covid-19 had relevant impact on non-infectious disease states, such as acute coronary syndromes.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Myocardial Infarction/mortality , Acute Disease , Aged , Berlin/epidemiology , COVID-19/complications , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , Myocardial Infarction/etiology , Treatment Outcome
15.
Am J Cardiol ; 144: 8-12, 2021 04 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1002270

ABSTRACT

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has greatly impacted the US healthcare system. Cardiac involvement in COVID-19 is common and manifested by troponin and natriuretic peptide elevation and tends to have a worse prognosis. We analyzed patients who presented to the MedStar Health system (11 hospitals in Washington, DC, and Maryland) with either an ST-elevation myocardial infarction or non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction early in the pandemic (March 1, 2020 to June 30, 2020) using the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision. Patients' clinical course and outcomes, including in-hospital mortality, were compared on the basis of the results of COVID-19 status (positive or negative). The cohort included 1533 patients admitted with an acute myocardial infarction (AMI), of whom 86 had confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection, during the study period. COVID-19-positive patients were older and non-White and had more co-morbidities. Furthermore, inflammatory markers and N-terminal-proB-type-natriuretic peptide were higher in COVID-19-positive AMI patients. Only 20.0% (17) of COVID-19-positive patients underwent coronary angiography. In-hospital mortality was significantly higher in AMI patients with concomitant COVID-19-positive status (27.9%) than in patients without COVID-19 during the same period (3.7%; p < 0.001). Patients with AMI and COVID-19 tended to be older, with more co-morbidities, when compared to those with an AMI and without COVID-19. In conclusion, myocardial infarction with concomitant COVID-19 was associated with increased in-hospital mortality. Efforts should be focused on the early recognition, evaluation, and treatment of these patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Myocardial Infarction/complications , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/mortality , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , Myocardial Infarction/mortality , Retrospective Studies , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/complications
16.
Anatol J Cardiol ; 24(5): 334-342, 2020 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-895744

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Delayed admission of myocardial infarction (MI) patients is an important prognostic factor. In the present nationwide registry (TURKMI-2), we evaluated the treatment delays and outcomes of patients with acute MI during the Covid-19 pandemic and compaired with a recentpre-pandemic registry (TURKMI-1). METHODS: The pandemic and pre-pandemic studies were conducted prospectively as 15-day snapshot registries in the same 48 centers. The inclusion criteria for both registries were aged ≥18 years and a final diagnosis of acute MI (AMI) with positive troponin levels. The only difference between the 2 registries was that the pre-pandemic (TURKMI-1) registry (n=1872) included only patients presenting within the first 48 hours after symptom-onset. TURKMI-2 enrolled all consecutive patients (n=1113) presenting with AMI during the pandemic period. RESULTS: A comparison of the patients with acute MI presenting within the 48-hour of symptom-onset in the pre-pandemic and pandemic registries revealed an overall 47.1% decrease in acute MI admissions during the pandemic. Median time from symptom-onset to hospital-arrival increased from 150 min to 185 min in patients with ST elevation MI (STEMI) and 295 min to 419 min in patients presenting with non-STEMI (NSTEMI) (p-values <0.001). Door-to-balloon time was similar in the two periods (37 vs. 40 min, p=0.448). In the pandemic period, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) decreased, especially in the NSTEMI group (60.3% vs. 47.4% in NSTEMI, p<0.001; 94.8% vs. 91.1% in STEMI, p=0.013) but the decrease was not significant in STEMI patients admitted within 12 hours of symptom-onset (94.9% vs. 92.1%; p=0.075). In-hospital major adverse cardiac events (MACE) were significantly increased during the pandemic period [4.8% vs. 8.9%; p<0.001; age- and sex-adjusted Odds ratio (95% CI) 1.96 (1.20-3.22) for NSTEMI, p=0.007; and 2.08 (1.38-3.13) for STEMI, p<0.001]. CONCLUSION: The present comparison of 2 nationwide registries showed a significant delay in treatment of patients presenting with acute MI during the COVID-19 pandemic. Although PCI was performed in a timely fashion, an increase in treatment delay might be responsible for the increased risk of MACE. Public education and establishing COVID-free hospitals are necessary to overcome patients' fear of using healthcare services and mitigate the potential complications of AMI during the pandemic. (Anatol J Cardiol 2020; 24: 334-42).


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Time-to-Treatment/statistics & numerical data , Aged , COVID-19 , Coronary Angiography/statistics & numerical data , Emergency Medical Services/statistics & numerical data , Female , Heart Failure/mortality , Heart Failure/therapy , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Myocardial Infarction/mortality , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/statistics & numerical data , Prognosis , Registries , Regression Analysis , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/mortality , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Shock, Cardiogenic/etiology , Shock, Cardiogenic/mortality , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome , Turkey/epidemiology
17.
J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown) ; 21(11): 869-873, 2020 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-810031

ABSTRACT

AIMS: The purpose of this study was to verify the impact on the number and characteristics of coronary invasive procedures for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) of two hub centers with cardiac catheterization facilities, during the first month of lockdown following the COVID-19 pandemic. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Procedural data of ACS patients admitted between 10 March and 10 April 2020 were compared with those of the same period of 2019. RESULTS: We observed a 23.4% reduction in ACS admissions during 2020, with a decrease for both ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) (-5.6%) and non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (-34.5%), albeit not statistically significant (P = 0.2). During the first 15 days of the examined periods, the reduction in ACS admissions reached 52.5% (-25% for STEMI and -70.3% for non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction, P = 0.04). Among STEMI patients, the rate of those with a time delay from symptoms onset longer than 180 min was significantly higher during the lockdown period (P = 0.01). Radiograph exposure (P = 0.01) was higher in STEMI patients treated in 2020 with a slightly higher amount of contrast medium (P = 0.1) and number of stents implanted (P = 0.1), whereas the number of treated vessels was reduced (P = 0.03). Percutaneous coronary intervention procedural success and in-hospital mortality were not different between the two groups and in STEMI patients (P NS for all). CONCLUSION: During the early phase, the COVID-19 outbreak was associated with a lower rate of admissions for ACS, with a substantial impact on the time delay presentation of STEMI patients, but apparently without affecting the in-hospital outcomes.


Subject(s)
Acute Coronary Syndrome , Coronavirus Infections , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Myocardial Infarction , Pandemics , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , Pneumonia, Viral , Acute Coronary Syndrome/diagnosis , Acute Coronary Syndrome/epidemiology , Acute Coronary Syndrome/etiology , Acute Coronary Syndrome/therapy , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Delayed Diagnosis/statistics & numerical data , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Infection Control/methods , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Myocardial Infarction/complications , Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , Myocardial Infarction/mortality , Myocardial Infarction/surgery , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care , Pandemics/prevention & control , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/adverse effects , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/methods , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Time-to-Treatment/statistics & numerical data
18.
PLoS One ; 15(9): e0239801, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-791620

ABSTRACT

While hospital admissions for myocardial infarction (MI) and pulmonary embolism (PE) are decreased during the COVID-19 pandemic, controversy remains about respective complication and mortality rates. This study evaluated admission rates, complications, and intrahospital mortality for selected life-threatening cardiovascular emergencies (MI, PE, and acute aortic dissection (AAD)) during COVID-19-associated restrictive social measures (RM) in Styria, Austria. By screening a patient information system for International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD) diagnosis codes covering more than 85% of acute hospital admissions in the state of Styria (~1.24 million inhabitants), we retrospectively identified patients with admission diagnoses for MI (I21, I22), PE (I26), and AAD (I71). Rates of complications such as cardiogenic shock and cardiopulmonary resuscitation, treatment escalations (thrombolysis for PE), and mortality were analyzed by patient chart review during 6 weeks following onset of COVID-19 associated RM, and during respective time frames in the years 2016 to 2019. 1,668 patients were included. Cumulative admissions for MI, PE and AAD decreased (RR 0.77; p<0.001) during RM compared to previous years. In contrast, intrahospital mortality increased by 65% (RR 1.65; p = 0.041), mainly driven by mortality following MI (RR 1.80; p = 0.042). PE patients received more frequently thrombolysis treatment (RR 3.63; p = 0.006), while rates of cardiogenic shock and cardiopulmonary resuscitation remained unchanged. Of 226 patients hospitalized during RM, 81 patients with suspected COVID-19 disease were screened for SARS-CoV-2 infection with only 5 testing positive. Thus, cumulative hospital admissions for cardiovascular emergencies decreased during COVID-19 associated RM while intrahospital mortality increased.


Subject(s)
Aneurysm, Dissecting/mortality , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Myocardial Infarction/mortality , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pulmonary Embolism/mortality , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Austria , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Emergency Service, Hospital/trends , Female , Hospital Mortality/trends , Hospitalization/trends , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
19.
Emerg Med Australas ; 32(6): 1040-1045, 2020 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-727090

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To determine if Victorian State of Emergency (SOE) measures to combat COVID-19 were associated with delayed presentations or management of acute stroke and acute myocardial infarction (AMI). METHODS: This was a retrospective, pre- and post-implementation study using data from an adult, tertiary cardiology and neurosciences centre with 24-h capacity for endovascular procedures. All primary presentations with acute stroke or AMI during the first 28 days of stage 2 and stage 3 SOE restrictions (26 March to 23 April 2020) were compared to an equivalent period without restrictions (26 March to 23 April 2019). The primary outcome variable was time from onset of symptoms to ED presentation. RESULTS: There were 52 (1.6% of all ED presentations) patients who met inclusion criteria during the SOE period and 57 (1.0%) patients in the comparator period. Patients were equally matched for demographics, disease severity and prior history of stroke or AMI. Median time from symptom onset to presentation was 227 (93-1183) min during the SOE period and 342 (119-1220) min during the comparator period (P = 0.24). Among eligible patients with ischaemic stroke or ST-elevation AMI, median time to primary reperfusion intervention was 65 (37-78) min during SOE and 44 (39-60) min in the comparator period (P = 0.54). There were no differences in mortality at hospital discharge (9.6% vs 10.5%) and hospital length of stay (5.4 vs 4.3 days). CONCLUSIONS: In the first 28 days, SOE measures to combat COVID-19 were not associated with delays in presentation or life-saving interventions for patients with acute stroke and AMI.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Infection Control , Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Stroke/epidemiology , Aged , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Infection Control/methods , Length of Stay/statistics & numerical data , Male , Myocardial Infarction/mortality , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , Stroke/mortality , Time Factors , Victoria/epidemiology
20.
J Korean Med Sci ; 35(27): e258, 2020 Jul 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-641805

ABSTRACT

A 60-year-old male patient with coronavirus disease-2019 showed new onset ST-segment elevation in V1-V2 leads on electrocardiogram and cardiac enzyme elevation in intensive care unit. He had a history of type 2 diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and dyslipidemia. He was receiving mechanical ventilation and veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation treatment for severe hypoxia. Two-D echocardiogram showed regional wall motion abnormalities. We performed primary percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction complicating cardiogenic shock under hemodynamic support. He expired on the 16th day of admission because of cardiogenic shock and multi-organ failure. Active surveillance and intensive treatment strategy are important for saving lives of COVID-19 patients with acute myocardial infarction.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/pathology , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/methods , Pneumonia, Viral/pathology , Shock, Cardiogenic/mortality , Shock, Cardiogenic/therapy , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Electrocardiography , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation , Humans , Hypoxia/therapy , Male , Middle Aged , Myocardial Infarction/complications , Myocardial Infarction/mortality , Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Shock, Cardiogenic/complications
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL