Comparison of reorganized versus unaltered cardiology departments during the COVID-19 era: A subanalysis of the COV-HF-SIRIO 6 study.

BACKGROUND: Since the beginning of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, numerous cardiology departments were reorganized to provide care for COVID-19 patients. We aimed to compare the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on hospital admissions and in-hospital mortality in reorganized vs. unaltered cardiology departments. METHODS: The present research is a subanalysis of a multicenter retrospective COV-HF-SIRIO 6 study that includes all patients (n = 101,433) hospitalized in 24 cardiology departments in Poland between January 1, 2019 and December 31, 2020, with a focus on patients with acute heart failure (AHF). RESULTS: Reduction of all-cause hospitalizations was 50.6% vs. 21.3% for reorganized vs. unaltered cardiology departments in 2020 vs. 2019, respectively (p < 0.0001). Considering AHF alone respective reductions by 46.5% and 15.2% were registered (p < 0.0001). A higher percentage of patients was brought in by ambulance to reorganized vs. unaltered cardiology departments (51.7% vs. 34.6%; p < 0.0001) alongside with a lower rate of self-referrals (45.7% vs. 58.4%; p < 0.0001). The rate of all-cause in-hospital mortality in AHF patients was higher in reorganized than unaltered cardiology departments (10.9% vs. 6.4%; p < 0.0001). After the exclusion of patients with concomitant COVID-19, the mortality rates did not differ significantly (6.9% vs. 6.4%; p = 0.55). CONCLUSIONS: A greater reduction in hospital admissions in 2020 vs. 2019, higher rates of patients brought by ambulance together with lower rates of self-referrals and higher all-cause in-hospital mortality for AHF due to COVID-19 related deaths were observed in cardiology departments reorganized to provide care for COVID-19 patients vs. unaltered ones.

TIMES TO ACT. Italian-Spanish-Polish-Uzbek Expert Forum Position Paper 2022. Dyslipidemia and arterial hypertension: The two most important and modifiable risk factors in clinical practice.

Hypertension and lipid disorders are two of the main cardiovascular risk factors. Both risk factors - if detected early enough - can be controlled and treated with modern, effective drugs, devoid of significant side effects, available in four countries as different as Italy, Spain, Poland, and Uzbekistan. The aim herein, was to develop this TIMES TO ACT consensus to raise the awareness of the available options of the modern and intensified dyslipidemia and arterial hypertension treatments. The subsequent paragraphs involves consensus and discussion of the deleterious effects of COVID-19 in the cardiovascular field, the high prevalence of hypertension and lipid disorders in our countries and the most important reasons for poor control of these two factors. Subsequently proposed, are currently the most efficient and safe therapeutic options in treating dyslipidemia and arterial hypertension, focusing on the benefits of single-pill combination (SPCs) in both conditions. An accelerated algorithm is proposed to start the treatment with a PCSK9 inhibitor, if the target low-density-lipoprotein values have not been reached. As most patients with hypertension and lipid disorders present with multiple comorbidities, discussed are the possibilities of using new SPCs, combining modern drugs from different therapeutic groups, which mode of action does not confirm the "class effect". We believe our consensus strongly advocates the need to search for patients with cardiovascular risk factors and intensify their lipid-lowering and antihypertensive treatment based on SPCs will improve the control of these two basic cardiovascular risk factors in Italy, Spain, Poland and Uzbekistan.

Comparing Atrial-Fibrillation Validated Rapid Scoring Systems in the Long-Term Mortality Prediction in Patients Referred for Elective Coronary Angiography: A Subanalysis of the Bialystok Coronary Project.

Rapid scoring systems validated in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) may be useful beyond their original purpose. Our aim was to assess the utility of CHA2DS2-VASc, HAS-BLED, and 2MACE scores in predicting long-term mortality in the population of the Bialystok Coronary Project, including AF patients. The initial study population consisted of 7409 consecutive patients admitted for elective coronary angiography between 2007 and 2016. The study endpoint was all-cause mortality, which occurred in 1244 (16.8%) patients during the follow-up, ranging from 1283 to 3059 days (median 2029 days). We noticed substantially increased all-cause mortality in patients with higher values of all compared scores. The accuracy of the scores in predicting all-cause mortality was also assessed using the receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves. The greatest predictive value for mortality was recorded for the CHA2DS2-VASc score in the overall study population (area under curve [AUC] = 0.665; 95% confidence interval [95%CI] 0.645-0.681). We observed that the 2MACE score (AUC = 0.656; 95%CI 0.619-0.681), but not the HAS-BLED score, had similar predictive value to the CHA2DS2-VASc score for all-cause mortality in the overall study population. In AF patients, all scores did not differ in all-cause mortality prediction. Additionally, we found that study participants with CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥3 vs. <3 had a 3-fold increased risk of long-term all-cause mortality (odds ratio 3.05; 95%CI 2.6-3.6). Our study indicates that clinical scores initially validated in AF patients may be useful for predicting mortality in a broader population (e.g., in patients referred for elective coronary angiography). According to our findings, all compared scores have a moderate predictive value. However, in our study, the CHA2DS2-VASc and 2MACE scores outperformed the HAS-BLED score in terms of the long-term all-cause mortality prediction.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on acute heart failure admissions and mortality: a multicentre study (COV-HF-SIRIO 6 study).

AIMS: The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has changed the landscape of medical care delivery worldwide. We aimed to assess the influence of COVID-19 pandemic on hospital admissions and in-hospital mortality rate in patients with acute heart failure (AHF) in a retrospective, multicentre study. METHODS AND RESULTS: From 1 January 2019 to 31 December 2020, a total of 101 433 patients were hospitalized in 24 Cardiology Departments in Poland. The number of patients admitted due to AHF decreased by 23.4% from 9853 in 2019 to 7546 in 2020 (P < 0.001). We noted a significant reduction of self-referrals in the times of COVID-19 pandemic accounting 27.8% (P < 0.001), with increased number of AHF patients brought by an ambulance by 15.9% (P < 0.001). The length of hospital stay was overall similar (7.7 ± 2.8 vs. 8.2 ± 3.7 days; P = not significant). The in-hospital all-cause mortality in AHF patients was 444 (5.2%) in 2019 vs. 406 (6.5%) in 2020 (P < 0.001). A total number of AHF patients with concomitant COVID-19 was 239 (3.2% of AHF patients hospitalized in 2020). The rate of in-hospital deaths in AHF patients with COVID-19 was extremely high accounting 31.4%, reaching up to 44.1% in the peak of the pandemic in November 2020. CONCLUSIONS: Our study indicates that the COVID-19 pandemic led to (i) reduced hospital admissions for AHF; (ii) decreased number of self-referred AHF patients and increased number of AHF patients brought by an ambulance; and (iii) increased in-hospital mortality for AHF with very high mortality rate for concomitant AHF and COVID-19.

Pharmacotherapy of atrial fibrillation in COVID-19 patients.

The coronavirus pandemic disease 2019 (COVID-19) has changed the face of contemporary medicine. However, each and every medical practitioner must be aware of potential early and late complications of COVID-19, its impact on chronic diseases - especially ones as common as atrial fibrillation (AF) - and the possible interactions between patients' chronic medications and pharmacotherapy of COVID-19. Patients with AF due to comorbidities and, often, elderly age are assumed to be at a higher risk of a severe course of COVID-19. This expert consensus summarizes the current knowledge regarding the pharmacotherapy of AF patients in the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic. In general, anticoagulation principles in quarantined or asymptomatic individuals remain unchanged. Nevertheless, it is advisable to switch from vitamin K antagonists to non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) whenever possible due to their consistent benefits and safety with fixed dosing and no monitoring. Additionally, in AF patients hospitalized due to mild or moderate COVID-19 pneumonia, we recommend continuing NOAC treatment or to switching to low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH). On the other hand, in severely ill patients hospitalized in intensive care units, intravenous or subcutaneous dosing is preferable to oral, which is why the treatment of choice is either LMWH or unfractionated heparin. Finally, particularly in critical scenarios, the treatment strategy in COVID-19 patients with AF should be individualized based on possible interactions between anticoagulants, antiarrhythmics, antivirals, and antibiotics. In this consensus, we also discuss how to safely perform COVID-19 vaccination in anticoagulated AF patients.