Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 17 de 17
Filter
1.
Am J Emerg Med ; 53: 68-72, 2022 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1530556

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Strict control measures under the COVID epidemic have brought an inevitable impact on ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI)'s emergency treatment. We investigated the impact of the COVID on the treatment of patients with STEMI undergoing primary PCI. METHODS: In this single center cohort study, we selected a time frame of 6 month after declaration of COVID-19 infection (Jan 24-July 24, 2020); a group of STEMI patients in the same period of 2019 was used as control. Finally, a total of 246 STEMI patients, who were underwent primary PCI, were enrolled into the study (136 non COVID-19 outbreak periods and 110 COVID-19 outbreak periods). The impact of COVID on the time of symptom onset to the first medical contact (symptom-to-FMC) and door to balloon (D-to-B) was investigated. Moreover, the primary outcome was in-hospital major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as a composite of cardiac death, heart failure and malignant arrhythmia. RESULTS: Compared with the same period in 2019, there was a 19% decrease in the total number of STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI at the peak of the pandemic in 2020. The delay in symptom-to-FMC was significantly longer in COVID Outbreak period (180 [68.75, 342] vs 120 [60,240] min, P = 0.003), and the D-to-B times increased significantly (148 [115-190] vs 84 [70-120] min, P < 0.001). However, among patients with STEMI, MACE was similar in both time periods (18.3% vs 25.7%, p = 0.168). On multivariable analysis, COVID was not independently associated with MACE; the history of diabetes, left main disease and age>65 years were the strongest predictors of MACE in the overall population. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID pandemic was not independently associated with MACE; suggesting that active primary PCI treatment preserved high-quality standards even when challenged by a severe epidemic. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://ClinicalTrials.gov Unique identifier: NCT04427735.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/statistics & numerical data , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Aged , Beijing/epidemiology , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/transmission , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/trends , Retrospective Studies , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , Time Factors , Time-to-Treatment/standards , Time-to-Treatment/statistics & numerical data , Treatment Outcome
2.
Heart ; 108(6): 458-466, 2022 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1495503

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The initial data of the International Study on Acute Coronary Syndromes - ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction COVID-19 showed in Europe a remarkable reduction in primary percutaneous coronary intervention procedures and higher in-hospital mortality during the initial phase of the pandemic as compared with the prepandemic period. The aim of the current study was to provide the final results of the registry, subsequently extended outside Europe with a larger inclusion period (up to June 2020) and longer follow-up (up to 30 days). METHODS: This is a retrospective multicentre registry in 109 high-volume primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) centres from Europe, Latin America, South-East Asia and North Africa, enrolling 16 674 patients with ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing PPPCI in March/June 2019 and 2020. The main study outcomes were the incidence of PPCI, delayed treatment (ischaemia time >12 hours and door-to-balloon >30 min), in-hospital and 30-day mortality. RESULTS: In 2020, during the pandemic, there was a significant reduction in PPCI as compared with 2019 (incidence rate ratio 0.843, 95% CI 0.825 to 0.861, p<0.0001). This reduction was significantly associated with age, being higher in older adults (>75 years) (p=0.015), and was not related to the peak of cases or deaths due to COVID-19. The heterogeneity among centres was high (p<0.001). Furthermore, the pandemic was associated with a significant increase in door-to-balloon time (40 (25-70) min vs 40 (25-64) min, p=0.01) and total ischaemia time (225 (135-410) min vs 196 (120-355) min, p<0.001), which may have contributed to the higher in-hospital (6.5% vs 5.3%, p<0.001) and 30-day (8% vs 6.5%, p=0.001) mortality observed during the pandemic. CONCLUSION: Percutaneous revascularisation for STEMI was significantly affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, with a 16% reduction in PPCI procedures, especially among older patients (about 20%), and longer delays to treatment, which may have contributed to the increased in-hospital and 30-day mortality during the pandemic. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04412655.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cardiologists/trends , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/trends , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/trends , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Time-to-Treatment/trends , Aged , Female , Hospital Mortality/trends , Humans , Incidence , Male , Middle Aged , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/adverse effects , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/mortality , Registries , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/mortality , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
4.
Open Heart ; 8(2)2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1341341

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care/trends , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/trends , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Aged , Databases, Factual , Female , Humans , Infection Control/trends , Ireland , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Acceptance of Health Care , Patient Transfer/trends , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/adverse effects , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/mortality , Retrospective Studies , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/diagnostic imaging , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/mortality , Time Factors , Time-to-Treatment/trends , Treatment Outcome
5.
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
6.
Clin Res Cardiol ; 110(2): 292-301, 2021 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1064474

ABSTRACT

AIMS: During the COVID-19 pandemic, hospital admissions for cardiac care have declined. However, effects on mortality are unclear. Thus, we sought to evaluate the impact of the lockdown period in central Germany on overall and cardiovascular deaths. Simultaneously we looked at catheterization activities in the same region. METHODS AND RESULTS: Data from 22 of 24 public health-authorities in central Germany were aggregated during the pandemic related lockdown period and compared to the same time period in 2019. Information on the total number of deaths and causes of death, including cardiovascular mortality, were collected. Additionally, we compared rates of hospitalization (n = 5178) for chronic coronary syndrome (CCS), acute coronary syndrome (ACS), and out of hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) in 26 hospitals in this area. Data on 5,984 deaths occurring between March 23, 2020 and April 26, 2020 were evaluated. In comparison to the reference non-pandemic period in 2019 (deaths: n = 5832), there was a non-significant increase in all-cause mortality of 2.6% [incidence rate ratio (IRR) 1.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.99-1.06; p = 0.16]. Cardiovascular and cardiac mortality increased significantly by 7.6% (IRR 1.08, 95%-CI 1.01-1.14; p = 0.02) and by 11.8% (IRR 1.12, 95%-CI 1.05-1.19; p < 0.001), respectively. During the same period, our data revealed a drop in cardiac catherization procedures. CONCLUSION: During the COVID-19-related lockdown a significant increase in cardiovascular mortality was observed in central Germany, whereas catherization activities were reduced. The mechanisms underlying both of these observations should be investigated further in order to better understand the effects of a pandemic-related lockdown and social-distancing restrictions on cardiovascular care and mortality.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cardiac Catheterization/trends , Cardiovascular Diseases/mortality , Cardiovascular Diseases/therapy , Hospitalization/trends , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/trends , Aged , Cardiac Catheterization/adverse effects , Cardiac Catheterization/mortality , Cardiovascular Diseases/diagnosis , Cause of Death/trends , Female , Germany , Hospital Mortality/trends , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/adverse effects , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/mortality , Risk Factors , Time Factors
7.
Cardiovasc Diabetol ; 19(1): 215, 2020 12 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-992485

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: It has been suggested the COVID pandemic may have indirectly affected the treatment and outcome of STEMI patients, by avoidance or significant delays in contacting the emergency system. No data have been reported on the impact of diabetes on treatment and outcome of STEMI patients, that was therefore the aim of the current subanalysis conducted in patients included in the International Study on Acute Coronary Syndromes-ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction (ISACS-STEMI) COVID-19. METHODS: The ISACS-STEMI COVID-19 is a retrospective registry performed in European centers with an annual volume of > 120 primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and assessed STEMI patients, treated with primary PCI during the same periods of the years 2019 versus 2020 (March and April). Main outcomes are the incidences of primary PCI, delayed treatment, and in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: A total of 6609 patients underwent primary PCI in 77 centers, located in 18 countries. Diabetes was observed in a total of 1356 patients (20.5%), with similar proportion between 2019 and 2020. During the pandemic, there was a significant reduction in primary PCI as compared to 2019, similar in both patients with (Incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.79 (95% CI: 0.73-0.85, p < 0.0001) and without diabetes (IRR 0.81 (95% CI: 0.78-0.85, p < 0.0001) (p int = 0.40). We observed a significant heterogeneity among centers in the population with and without diabetes (p < 0.001, respectively). The heterogeneity among centers was not related to the incidence of death due to COVID-19 in both groups of patients. Interaction was observed for Hypertension (p = 0.024) only in absence of diabetes. Furthermore, the pandemic was independently associated with a significant increase in door-to-balloon and total ischemia times only among patients without diabetes, which may have contributed to the higher mortality, during the pandemic, observed in this group of patients. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic had a significant impact on the treatment of patients with STEMI, with a similar reduction in primary PCI procedures in both patients with and without diabetes. Hypertension had a significant impact on PCI reduction only among patients without diabetes. We observed a significant increase in ischemia time and door-to-balloon time mainly in absence of diabetes, that contributed to explain the increased mortality observed in this group of patients during the pandemic. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04412655.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiology , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/trends , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Time-to-Treatment/trends , Aged , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/mortality , Diabetes Mellitus/diagnosis , Diabetes Mellitus/mortality , Europe/epidemiology , Female , Hospital Mortality/trends , Humans , Hypertension/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/adverse effects , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/mortality , Registries , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/mortality , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
8.
Ther Adv Cardiovasc Dis ; 14: 1753944720977732, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-961278

ABSTRACT

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


Subject(s)
Acute Coronary Syndrome/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , Acute Coronary Syndrome/diagnosis , Acute Coronary Syndrome/therapy , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/diagnosis , Female , Heart Disease Risk Factors , Humans , London/epidemiology , Male , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/trends , Retrospective Studies , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Time Factors
9.
J Cardiovasc Pharmacol ; 76(5): 540-548, 2020 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-917717

ABSTRACT

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


Subject(s)
Cardiology Service, Hospital/trends , Coronavirus Infections , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care/trends , Pandemics , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/trends , Pneumonia, Viral , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Thrombolytic Therapy/trends , Time-to-Treatment/trends , Aged , COVID-19 , China , Coronary Angiography/trends , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/mortality , Patient Admission , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/adverse effects , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/instrumentation , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/mortality , Thrombolytic Therapy/adverse effects , Thrombolytic Therapy/mortality , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
10.
Circ J ; 84(12): 2185-2189, 2020 11 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-788838

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Acute Coronary Syndrome/therapy , COVID-19 , Coronary Artery Disease/therapy , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care/trends , Pandemics , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/trends , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Acute Coronary Syndrome/diagnostic imaging , Cardiologists/trends , Clinical Decision-Making , Coronary Artery Disease/diagnostic imaging , Health Care Surveys , Humans , Japan , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/adverse effects , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/trends , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/diagnostic imaging , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
11.
J Am Coll Cardiol ; 76(11): 1375-1384, 2020 09 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-764912

ABSTRACT

The worldwide pandemic caused by the novel acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 has resulted in a new and lethal disease termed coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). Although there is an association between cardiovascular disease and COVID-19, the majority of patients who need cardiovascular care for the management of ischemic heart disease may not be infected with this novel coronavirus. The objective of this document is to provide recommendations for a systematic approach for the care of patients with an acute myocardial infarction (AMI) during the COVID-19 pandemic. There is a recognition of two major challenges in providing recommendations for AMI care in the COVID-19 era. Cardiovascular manifestations of COVID-19 are complex with patients presenting with AMI, myocarditis simulating an ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) presentation, stress cardiomyopathy, non-ischemic cardiomyopathy, coronary spasm, or nonspecific myocardial injury, and the prevalence of COVID-19 disease in the U.S. population remains unknown with risk of asymptomatic spread. This document addresses the care of these patients focusing on 1) the varied clinical presentations; 2) appropriate personal protection equipment (PPE) for health care workers; 3) role of the Emergency Department, Emergency Medical System and the Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory; and 4) Regional STEMI systems of care. During the COVID-19 pandemic, primary PCI remains the standard of care for STEMI patients at PCI capable hospitals when it can be provided in a timely fashion, with an expert team outfitted with PPE in a dedicated CCL room. A fibrinolysis-based strategy may be entertained at non-PCI capable referral hospitals or in specific situations where primary PCI cannot be executed or is not deemed the best option.


Subject(s)
Cardiology Service, Hospital/organization & administration , Coronavirus Infections , Emergency Service, Hospital/organization & administration , Infection Control , Myocardial Infarction , Pandemics , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , Pneumonia, Viral , Thrombolytic Therapy , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/physiopathology , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Diagnosis, Differential , Humans , Infection Control/methods , Infection Control/organization & administration , Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Organizational Innovation , Pandemics/prevention & control , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/methods , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/trends , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/physiopathology , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Risk Assessment , SARS-CoV-2 , Thrombolytic Therapy/methods , Thrombolytic Therapy/trends , United States
12.
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv ; 97(4): E475-E483, 2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-684468

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: During coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic, reducing the number of invasive procedure and choosing conservative medication strategy for patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) is unavoidable. Whether this relatively conservative strategy will impact in-hospital outcome for NSTEMI patients remains unclear. METHODS AND RESULTS: The current study included all consecutive NSTEMI patients who visited the emergency department in Fuwai Hospital from February 1 to March 31, 2020 and all the NSTEMI patients in the same period of 2019 as a historical control. Very-high-risk patients were defined as clinical presentation of heart failure, cardiac shock, cardiac arrest, recurrent chest pain, and life-threatening arrhythmias. The primary outcome was in-hospital major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as a composite of all-cause death, recurrent myocardial infarction, or heart failure. A total of 115 NSTEMI patients were enrolled since the outbreak of COVID-19, and a total of 145 patients were included in the control group. There was a tendency toward higher MACE risk in 2020 compared with 2019 (18.3% vs. 11.7%, p = .14). Among very-high-risk patients, early percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) strategy in 2019 was associated with reduced MACE risk compared with delayed PCI in 2020 (60.6% [20/33] in 2020 vs. 27.9% [12/43] in 2019, p = .01). CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 pandemic results in a significant reduction in immediate/early PCI and a trend toward higher adverse event rate during hospitalization, particular in very-high-risk patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cardiology Service, Hospital/trends , Cardiovascular Agents/therapeutic use , Coronary Artery Bypass/trends , Emergency Service, Hospital/trends , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/trends , Public Health/trends , Aged , Beijing , Cardiovascular Agents/adverse effects , Coronary Artery Bypass/adverse effects , Coronary Artery Bypass/mortality , Female , Heart Failure/etiology , Hospital Mortality/trends , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/complications , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/mortality , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/adverse effects , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/mortality , Recurrence , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
13.
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv ; 96(6): E568-E575, 2020 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-655474

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cardiologists/trends , Coronary Angiography/trends , Heart Diseases/diagnostic imaging , Heart Diseases/therapy , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care/trends , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/trends , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/trends , Aged , Coronary Angiography/adverse effects , Databases, Factual , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/adverse effects , Poland , Registries , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
14.
Clin Res Cardiol ; 109(12): 1511-1521, 2020 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-648791

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cardiology Service, Hospital/trends , Delivery of Health Care, Integrated/trends , Hospitalization/trends , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care/trends , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/trends , Regional Health Planning/trends , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Germany/epidemiology , Hospital Mortality/trends , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/mortality , Prospective Studies , Quality Indicators, Health Care/trends , Registries , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/mortality , Time Factors , Time-to-Treatment/trends , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL