Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 96
Filter
1.
BMC Cardiovasc Disord ; 22(1): 473, 2022 11 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2108742

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) has emerged as an increasingly diagnosed cause of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), which is easily missed or delayed. The effective use of coronary angiography (CAG) and advanced intracoronary imaging examinations in STEMI patients has led to increased detection of SCAD. CASE PRESENTATION: A 59-year-old woman with acute angina pectoris was diagnosed with STEMI detected by electrocardiography combined with measurement of myocardial enzymes. Due to the ongoing pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Wuhan, she was first given thrombolytic therapy after excluding contraindications according to the requirements of the current consensus statement; however, subsequently, both the symptoms of ongoing chest pain and the electrocardiographic results indicated the failure of thrombolytic therapy, so the intervention team administered rescue percutaneous coronary intervention treatment under third-grade protection. CAG confirmed total occlusion in the distal left anterior descending (LAD) artery, with thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) 0 flow, whereas the left circumflex and right coronary arteries appeared normal, with TIMI 3 flow. Intravenous ultrasound (IVUS) was further performed to investigate the causes of occlusion, which verified the absence of atherosclerosis but detected SCAD with intramural haematoma. During the operation, the guidewire reached the distal end of the LAD artery smoothly, the balloon was dilated slightly, and the reflow of TIMI blood could be seen by repeated CAG. During the follow-up period of one and a half years, the patient complained of occasional, slight chest tightness. The repeated CAG showed that the spontaneous dissection in the LAD artery had healed well, with TIMI 3 flow. The repeated IVUS confirmed that the SCAD and intramural haematoma had been mostly resorbed and repaired. CONCLUSION: This was a case of failed STEMI thrombolysis in our hospital during the outbreak of COVID-19. This case indicates that doctors need to consider the cause of the disease when treating STEMI patients, especially patients without traditional cardiovascular risk factors. Moreover, CAG and intracoronary imaging examinations should be actively performed to identify the aetiology and improve the treatment success rate.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Myocardial Infarction , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/diagnostic imaging , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/etiology , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/therapy , COVID-19/complications , Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Coronary Angiography/adverse effects , Thrombolytic Therapy/adverse effects , Hematoma/complications
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.
Folia Med Cracov ; 62(2): 71-92, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2081393

ABSTRACT

I n t r o d u c t i o n: The COVID-19 pandemic has put healthcare systems worldwide under huge strain, resulting in a significant loss of their capacity and availability. Patients have become more reluctant to contact their doctors or call an ambulance in case of myocardial infarction (MI) symptoms onset. It has been accompanied by a significant decrease in the number of coronary angiography and PCI procedures performed. O b j e c t i v e s: The aim of the study is to evaluate the role of online health information in the patient- dependent phase of MI management during the COVID-19 lockdown in Europe. Methods: We analyzed Google Trends data on the popularity of phrases related to MI symptoms, respiratory tract infection, urological complaints, and terms unrelated to health, for the period of the first COVID-19 lockdown, along with the data from the corresponding weeks from 2017-2019 in seven European countries. R e s u l t s: The search volume for particular symptoms of myocardial infarction increased in all studied countries, compared to the analogous period from 2017-2019, with a significant increase in for chest pain, shortness of breath, fear, and palpitations in most countries. These changes have not been accompanied by increased interest in terms related to respiratory tract infection symptoms and urological complaints. C o n c l u s i o n s: Our findings suggest that during lockdown, patients with MI symptoms may have tried to manage their complaints on their own, using information from the Internet. This demonstrates the growing role of the Internet in the patient's decision-making process in the emergency situation, indicating a growing need for reliable and freely available online information provided by healthcare professionals.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Myocardial Infarction , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , Pandemics , Communicable Disease Control , Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Europe/epidemiology
4.
J Infect Dev Ctries ; 16(9): 1417-1423, 2022 09 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2066671

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The treatment of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) during the COVID-19 pandemic has been affected to varying degrees. This study is the first to explore the impact of COVID-19 on the treatment and prognosis of rural and urban AMI in developing countries. METHODOLOGY: A total of 128 patients with AMI in our hospital during the COVID-19 pandemic were enrolled. A total of 197 patients diagnosed with AMI before the COVID-19 pandemic were selected as the control group and one year of follow-up was performed. RESULTS: Hospital stay and the proportion of Killip class ≥ 2 patients were increased among rural AMI patients in the 'during COVID-19' group, compared with the 'before COVID-19' group. Among ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) total and rural STEMI patients, the treatment time in the during-COVID-19 group was longer than that in the before-COVID-19 group, whereas only the symptom to door (S to D) total and door to balloon (D to B) were extended in urban STEMI patients. In AMI total and rural AMI patients, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) and all-cause mortality were increased in the during-COVID-19 group compared with the before-COVID-19 group. Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed that the survival and occurrence of MACEs in AMI total and rural AMI patients were significantly higher in the during-COVID-19 group. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic led to delayed treatment and worse prognosis in AMI patients. Rural areas appear to be at a greater risk.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Myocardial Infarction , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans , Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Pandemics , Prognosis , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Time Factors
5.
Physiol Int ; 109(3): 419-426, 2022 Sep 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2065212

ABSTRACT

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted many aspects of acute myocardial infarction. Based on literature data, the prognosis of COVID+, STEMI patients is significantly worse than that of COVID- STEMI patients. On the other hand, physicians report fewer acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients presenting to hospitals in countries severely affected by the pandemic. It is concerning that patients with life-threatening illness can suffer more complications or die due to their myocardial infarction. We aimed to investigate the changes in myocardial infarction care in the country's biggest PCI-center and to compare total 30-day mortality in COVID+ and COVID-patients with acute myocardial infarction treated at the Semmelweis University Heart and Vascular Center, and to investigate risk factors and complications in these two groups. Methods: Between 8 October 2020 and 30 April 2021, 43 COVID+, in 2018-2019, 397 COVID-patients with acute myocardial infarction were admitted. Total admission rates pre- and during the pandemic were compared. Results: Within 30 days, 8 of 43 patients in the COVID+ group (18.60%), and 40 of the 397 patients in the control group (10.07%) died (P = 0.01). Regarding the comorbidities, more than half of COVID+ patients had a significantly reduced ejection fraction (EF≤ 40%), and the prevalence of heart failure was significantly higher in this group (51.16% vs. 27.84%, P = 0.0329). There was no significant difference between the two patient groups in the incidence of STEMI and NSTEMI. Although there was no significant difference, VF (11.63% vs. 6.82%), resuscitation (23.26% vs. 10.08%), and ECMO implantation (2.38% vs. 1.26%) were more common in the COVID+ group. The mean age was 68.8 years in the COVID+ group and 67.6 years in the control group. The max. Troponin also did not differ significantly between the two groups (1,620 vs. 1,470 ng/L). There was a significant decline in admission rates in the first as well as in the second wave of the pandemic. Conclusions: The 30-day total mortality of COVID+ patients was significantly higher, and a more severe proceeding of acute myocardial infarction and a higher incidence of complications can be observed. As the secondary negative effect of the pandemic serious decline in admission rates can be detected.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Myocardial Infarction , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/therapy , Humans , Hungary/epidemiology , Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Pandemics , Prognosis , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Troponin
6.
Clin Cardiol ; 45(10): 1070-1078, 2022 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2013438

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The implications of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection on outcomes after invasive therapeutic strategies among patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) are not well studied. HYPOTHESIS: To assess the outcomes of COVID-19 patients presenting with AMI undergoing an early invasive treatment strategy. METHODS: This study was a cross-sectional, retrospective analysis of the National COVID Cohort Collaborative database including all patients presenting with a recorded diagnosis of AMI (ST-elevation myocardial infarction (MI) and non-ST elevation MI). COVID-19 positive patients with AMI were stratified into one of four groups: (1a) patients who had a coronary angiogram with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) within 3 days of their AMI; (1b) PCI within 3 days of AMI with coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) within 30 days; (2a) coronary angiogram without PCI and without CABG within 30 days; and (2b) coronary angiogram with CABG within 30 days. The main outcomes were respiratory failure, cardiogenic shock, prolonged length of stay, rehospitalization, and death. RESULTS: There were 10 506 COVID-19 positive patients with a diagnosis of AMI. COVID-19 positive patients with PCI had 8.2 times higher odds of respiratory failure than COVID-19 negative patients (p = .001). The odds of prolonged length of stay were 1.7 times higher in COVID-19 patients who underwent PCI (p = .024) and 1.9 times higher in patients who underwent coronary angiogram followed by CABG (p = .001). CONCLUSION: These data demonstrate that COVID-19 positive patients with AMI undergoing early invasive coronary angiography had worse outcomes than COVID-19 negative patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Myocardial Infarction , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , Respiratory Insufficiency , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/adverse effects , Retrospective Studies , Treatment Outcome
7.
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv ; 100(4): 568-574, 2022 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2013401

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate characteristics and outcomes of patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock (AMICS) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has created challenges in delivering acute cardiovascular care. Quality measures and outcomes of patients presenting with AMICS during COVID-19 in the United States have not been well described. METHODS: We identified 406 patients from the National Cardiogenic Shock Initiative (NCSI) with AMICS and divided them into those presenting before (N = 346, 5/9/2016-2/29/2020) and those presenting during the COVID-19 pandemic (N = 60, 3/1/2020-11/10/2020). We compared baseline clinical data, admission characteristics, and outcomes. RESULTS: The median age of the cohort was 64 years, and 23.7% of the group was female. There were no significant differences in age, sex, and medical comorbidities between the two groups. Patients presenting during the pandemic were less likely to be Black compared to those presenting prior. Median door to balloon (90 vs. 88 min, p = 0.38), door to support (88 vs. 78 min, p = 0.13), and the onset of shock to support (74 vs. 62 min, p = 0.15) times were not significantly different between the two groups. Patients presented with ST-elevation myocardial infarction more often during the COVID-19 period (95.0% vs. 80.0%, p = 0.005). In adjusted logistic regression models, COVID-19 period did not significantly associate with survival to discharge (odds ratio [OR] 1.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.54-2.19, p = 0.81) or with 1-month survival (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.42-1.61, p = 0.56). CONCLUSIONS: Care of patients presenting with AMICS has remained robust among hospitals participating in the NCSI during the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Heart-Assist Devices , Myocardial Infarction , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction , COVID-19/complications , Female , Heart-Assist Devices/adverse effects , Humans , Middle Aged , Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , Myocardial Infarction/etiology , Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Pandemics , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/adverse effects , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/etiology , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Shock, Cardiogenic/diagnosis , Shock, Cardiogenic/etiology , Shock, Cardiogenic/therapy , Treatment Outcome , United States/epidemiology
8.
Crit Pathw Cardiol ; 21(3): 141-146, 2022 09 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2001473

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: COVID-19 infection can involve the cardiovascular system and worsen the prognosis of the patients. This study aimed to investigate the adverse effects of COVID-19 on angiographic and clinical outcomes of primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with acute ST-elevation MI and compare results with those patients without COVID-19 disease. METHODS: The study was a retrospective observational cohort, in which patients presented with ST-elevation MI from February 2020 to April 2021, treated with primary PCI were divided into 2 groups based on the COVID-19 infection. Then, the procedural and angiographic indices and also clinical outcomes were compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: A total of 1150 patients were enrolled in the study. Those with established COVID-19 infection had worse baseline thrombolysis in myocardial infarction flow grade and also were at higher risk for worse procedural outcomes such as lower thrombolysis in myocardial infarction frame count, myocardial blush grade, and slow-flow coronary disease, after the primary PCI. Additionally, the presence of COVID-19 at the time of primary PCI was related to a significantly higher duration of hospitalization and in-hospital mortality. Given the potential impact of other factors on outcomes, analysis for all of the primary endpoints was done again after adjustment of these factors and the results were the same as before, suggesting the independent effect of COVID-19 infection. CONCLUSIONS: The concomitant COVID-19 infection in the patients undergoing primary PCI is associated with significantly worse angiographic, procedural and clinical outcomes. Surprisingly, this finding is regardless of patients' baseline risk factors and demographical characteristics.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Myocardial Infarction , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/epidemiology , Coronary Angiography , Humans , Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/methods , Retrospective Studies , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/etiology , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/surgery , Treatment Outcome
9.
Clin Res Cardiol ; 111(10): 1174-1182, 2022 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1982134

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In this retrospective routine data analysis, we investigate the number of emergency department (ED) consultations during the COVID-19 pandemic of 2020 in Germany compared to the previous year with a special focus on numbers of myocardial infarction and acute heart failure. METHODS: Aggregated case numbers for the two consecutive years 2019 and 2020 were obtained from 24 university hospitals and 9 non-university hospitals in Germany and assessed by age, gender, triage scores, disposition, care level and by ICD-10 codes including the tracer diagnoses myocardial infarction (I21) and heart failure (I50). RESULTS: A total of 2,216,627 ED consultations were analyzed, of which 1,178,470 occurred in 2019 and 1,038,157 in 2020. The median deviation in case numbers between 2019 and 2020 was - 14% [CI (- 11)-(- 16)]. After a marked drop in all cases in the first COVID-19 wave in spring 2020, case numbers normalized during the summer. Thereafter starting in calendar week 39 case numbers constantly declined until the end of the year 2020. The decline in case numbers predominantly concerned younger [- 16%; CI (- 13)-(- 19)], less urgent [- 18%; CI (- 12)-(- 22)] and non-admitted cases [- 17%; CI (- 13)-(- 20)] in particular during the second wave. During the entire observation period admissions for chest pain [- 13%; CI (- 21)-2], myocardial infarction [- 2%; CI (- 9)-11] and heart failure [- 2%; CI (- 10)-6] were less affected and remained comparable to the previous year. CONCLUSIONS: ED visits were noticeably reduced during both SARS-CoV-2 pandemic waves in Germany but cardiovascular diagnoses were less affected and no refractory increase was noted. However, long-term effects cannot be ruled out and need to be analysed in future studies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Heart Failure , Myocardial Infarction , COVID-19/epidemiology , Data Analysis , Emergency Service, Hospital , Humans , Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
10.
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
11.
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
12.
Trials ; 23(1): 522, 2022 Jun 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1962887

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Treatment of acute myocardial infarction has been the subject of studies over the past years. However, the initial months after myocardial infarction are crucial from the perspective of the patient's prognosis. It is extremely important to take care of all cardiovascular risk factors and undergo a full rehabilitation program. Telemedical solutions are becoming more and more relevant in everyday practice. We describe a protocol of a study evaluating the use of the mobile application "afterAMI" in patients after myocardial infarction. The app offers an educational mode, calendar, vital signs diary, medication reminders, medical history card, and healthcare professional contact panel. It offers several solutions, which individually proved to be effective and improve a patient's prognosis. Despite general promising results from previous studies regarding telemedical tools, there is a paucity of evidence when it comes to prospective randomized trials. Our aim was to perform a comprehensive evaluation of a newly developed mobile application in the clinical setting. METHODS: A group of 100 patients with myocardial infarction on admission at the 1st Chair and Department of Cardiology, Medical University of Warsaw, will be recruited into the study. The project aims to assess the impact of the application-supported model of care in comparison with standard rehabilitation. At the end of the study, cardiovascular risk factors will be analyzed, along with rehospitalizations, the patients' knowledge regarding cardiovascular risk factors, returning to work, and quality of life. In this prospective, open-label, randomized, single-center study, all 100 patients will be observed for 6 months after discharge from the hospital. Endpoints will be assessed during control visits 1 and 6 months after inclusion into the study. DISCUSSION: This project is an example of a telemedical solution application embracing everyday clinical practices, conforming with multiple international cardiac societies' guidelines. Cardiac rehabilitation process enhancements are required to improve patients' prognosis. The evidence regarding the use of the mobile application in the described group of patients is limited and usually covers a small number of participants. The described study aims to discuss whether telemedicine use in this context is beneficial for the patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04793425 . Registered on 11 March 2021.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Mobile Applications , Myocardial Infarction , Humans , Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Prospective Studies , Quality of Life , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , SARS-CoV-2
13.
Cardiol Clin ; 40(3): 345-353, 2022 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1944428

ABSTRACT

The global health crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic has evolved rapidly to overburden health care organizations around the world and has resulted in significant morbidity and mortality. Many countries have reported a substantial and rapid reduction in hospital admissions for acute coronary syndromes and percutaneous coronary intervention. The reasons for such abrupt changes in health care delivery are multifactorial and include lockdowns, reduction in outpatient services, reluctance to seek medical attention for fear of contracting the virus, and restrictive visitation policies adopted during the pandemic. This review discusses the impact of COVID-19 on important aspects of acute MI care.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Myocardial Infarction , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction , Communicable Disease Control , Humans , Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Pandemics
15.
Rural Remote Health ; 22(2): 6658, 2022 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1893584

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Evidence on the association of socioeconomic deprivation with occurrence of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is available from international studies and urban settings in western Germany. This study aimed to assess this association based on small geographical areas in a rural setting in eastern Germany. METHODS: This study used routine data of all patients with AMI who were treated in the Hospital Brandenburg in the city of Brandenburg, Germany, between May 2019 and May 2020. Hospitalisation rates of AMI were calculated for postal code regions that were located within the catchment area of the Hospital Brandenburg. Poisson regression was used to compare hospitalisation rates in areas with medium socioeconomic deprivation to areas with high deprivation, controlling for age group, sex and period (before or during COVID-19 pandemic). Publicly available social, infrastructure and healthcare-related features were mapped to characterise the study region. RESULTS: In total, 265 cases of AMI were registered in the study area, which comprised 116,126 inhabitants. The city of Brandenburg was characterised by the highest level of socioeconomic deprivation, while neighbouring areas showed a rural settlement structure and medium levels of deprivation. The number of general practitioners per 10 000 inhabitants did not differ between both areas. The adjusted rate ratio comparing hospitalisations due to AMI in areas with medium socioeconomic deprivation to areas with high socioeconomic deprivation was 0.71 (95%CI 0.56-0.91, p=0.01). CONCLUSION: This study adds evidence about the association of socioeconomic deprivation and AMI occurrence from a rural area in eastern Germany. Further research about the relationship of socioeconomic deprivation and cardiovascular health is needed from heterogeneous contexts.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Myocardial Infarction , Germany/epidemiology , Hospitalization , Humans , Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Pandemics , Socioeconomic Factors
17.
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
18.
Front Public Health ; 9: 711222, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1775827

ABSTRACT

Background: Myocardial infarction (MI) occurs frequently and requires considerable health care resources. It is important to ensure that the treatments which are provided are both clinically effective and economically justifiable. Based on recent new evidence, routine oxygen therapy is no longer recommended in MI patients without hypoxemia. By using data from a nationwide randomized clinical trial, we estimated oxygen therapy related cost savings in this important clinical setting. Methods: The DETermination of the role of Oxygen in suspected Acute Myocardial Infarction (DETO2X-AMI) trial randomized 6,629 patients from 35 hospitals across Sweden to oxygen at 6 L/min for 6-12 h or ambient air. Costs for drug and medical supplies, and labor were calculated per patient, for the whole study population, and for the total annual care episodes for MI in Sweden (N = 16,100) with 10 million inhabitants. Results: Per patient, costs were estimated to 36 USD, summing up to a total cost of 119,832 USD for the whole study population allocated to oxygen treatment. Applied to the annual care episodes for MI in Sweden, costs sum up to between 514,060 and 604,777 USD. In the trial, 62 (2%) patients assigned to oxygen and 254 (8%) patients assigned to ambient air developed hypoxemia. A threshold analysis suggested that up to a cut-off of 624 USD spent for hypoxemia treatment related costs per patient, avoiding routine oxygen therapy remains cost saving. Conclusions: Avoiding routine oxygen therapy in patients with suspected or confirmed MI without hypoxemia at baseline saves significant expenditure for the health care system both with regards to medical and human resources. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT01787110.


Subject(s)
Myocardial Infarction , Health Expenditures , Humans , Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Oxygen , Treatment Outcome
19.
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
20.
Heart ; 108(14): 1129-1136, 2022 06 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1769936

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Treatment of acute myocardial infarction (MI) requires rapid transfer of people with chest pain to hospital, however, unscheduled care pathways vary in their directness (the minimal number of contacts to hospital admission). The aim was to examine unscheduled care pathways and the associations with mortality in people admitted with MI. METHODS: Retrospective population study of all people admitted to Scottish hospitals with a diagnosis of MI between 1 January 2015 and 31 December 2017. Linked data for all National Health Service Scotland unscheduled care services (NHS24 telephone triage service, primary care out of hours, ambulance, emergency department (ED)) was used to define continuous unscheduled care pathways (pathways), which were categorised by initial contact, and whether they were 'direct' (had minimum number of contacts between first contact and admission). Analysis estimated ORs and 95% CIs in adjusted models in which all covariates were included. RESULTS: 26 325 people admitted with MI (63.1% men, 61.6% aged 65+ years), of whom 5.6% died from coronary heart disease within 28 days. For 47.0%, the first unscheduled care contact was ambulance, 23.3% attended ED directly and 18.7% called telephone triage. 92.1% of pathways were direct. Pathways starting with telephone triage were more likely to be indirect compared with other initial contacts (adjusted OR (aOR) 1.97, 95% CI 1.61 to 2.40). Compared to direct pathways, indirect pathways starting with telephone triage were associated with higher mortality (aOR 1.97, 95% CI 1.61 to 2.40) as were indirect pathways starting with another service (aOR 1.55, 95% CI 1.19 to 2.01), but not direct pathways starting with telephone triage (aOR 0.87, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.02). CONCLUSION: Unscheduled care pathways leading to admission with MI in Scotland are usually direct, but those starting with telephone triage were more commonly indirect. Those indirect pathways were associated with higher mortality.


Subject(s)
Myocardial Infarction , Triage , Critical Pathways , Emergency Service, Hospital , Female , Humans , Male , Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Retrospective Studies , State Medicine
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL