Clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients requiring prolonged mechanical circulatory support after high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data on the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients who require prolonged mechanical circulatory support (MCS) after Impella-supported high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (HR-PCI). AIMS: The aim of this study is to describe the contemporary clinical characteristics, outcomes, and predictors associated with prolonged MCS support after assisted HR-PCI. METHODS: Patients enrolled in the prospective, multicentre, clinical endpoint-adjudicated PROTECT III study who had undergone HR-PCI using Impella were evaluated. Patient and procedural characteristics and outcomes for those who received prolonged MCS beyond the duration of their index procedure were compared to those in whom MCS was successfully weaned and explanted at the conclusion of the index PCI. RESULTS: Among 1,155 patients who underwent HR-PCI with Impella between 2017 and 2020 and had sufficient data to confirm the duration of Impella support, 16.5% received prolonged MCS (mean duration 25.2±31.1 hours compared with 1.8±5.8 hours for those who only received intraprocedural MCS). Patients receiving prolonged support presented with more urgent indications (e.g., acute coronary syndromes [ACS], lower ejection fraction [EF], elevated baseline heart rate and lower systolic blood pressure). Use of the Impella CP, intraprocedural complications, periprocedural complications and in-hospital mortality were all more common amongst the prolonged MCS group. Prolonged MCS was associated with increased rates of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events, cardiovascular death, and all-cause mortality at 90-day follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Patients receiving prolonged MCS after Impella-supported HR-PCI presented with more ACS, reduced EF and less favourable haemodynamics. Additionally, they were more likely to experience intraprocedural and periprocedural complications as well as increased in-hospital and post-discharge mortality.

Treatment of Acute Myocardial Infarction and Cardiogenic Shock: Outcomes of the RECOVER III Postapproval Study by Society of Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions Shock Stage.

BACKGROUND: The Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions proposed a staging system (A-E) to predict prognosis in cardiogenic shock. Herein, we report clinical outcomes of the RECOVER III study for the first time, according to Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions shock classification. METHODS AND RESULTS: The RECOVER III study is an observational, prospective, multicenter, single-arm, postapproval study of patients with acute myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with Impella support. Patients enrolled in the RECOVER III study were assigned a baseline Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions shock stage. Staging was then repeated within 24 hours after initiation of Impella. Kaplan-Meier survival curve analyses were conducted to assess survival across Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions shock stages at both time points. At baseline assessment, 16.5%, 11.4%, and 72.2% were classified as stage C, D, and E, respectively. At ≤24-hour assessment, 26.4%, 33.2%, and 40.0% were classified as stage C, D, and E, respectively. Thirty-day survival among patients with stage C, D, and E shock at baseline was 59.7%, 56.5%, and 42.9%, respectively (P=0.003). Survival among patients with stage C, D, and E shock at ≤24 hours was 65.7%, 52.1%, and 29.5%, respectively (P<0.001). After multivariable analysis of impact of shock stage classifications at baseline and ≤24 hours, only stage E classification at ≤24 hours was a significant predictor of mortality (odds ratio, 4.8; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In a real-world cohort of patients with acute myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with Impella support, only stage E classification at ≤24 hours was significantly predictive of mortality, suggesting that response to therapy may be more important than clinical severity of shock at presentation.

Acute coronary syndrome in an anomalous mid-LAD right coronary artery: Don't forget to look twice before turning left.

A 68-year-old female with past medical history of hypertension, hyperlipidemia, multiple sclerosis, diverticulitis, and tobacco use presented with 1 day of atypical chest pain after a recent diverticulitis flare. Initial workup was notable for a normal electrocardiogram but elevated high sensitivity troponin T (616 ng/L). Due to persistent symptoms, the patient was given antiplatelet therapy and taken urgently to the catheterization lab where she was found to have complete occlusion of an anomalous right coronary artery branching off the mid-left anterior descending artery. Angioplasty was performed with a drug-eluting stent and her symptoms resolved. The patient recovered well and was discharged on appropriate medical therapy. This case demonstrates a case of acute coronary syndrome in an extremely rare coronary congenital abnormality. Further research is needed on when to be suspicious for coronary anomalies on patients presenting with myocardial infarction.

Short- and Mid-Term Outcomes of Complex and High-Risk Versus Standard Percutaneous Coronary Interventions in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients undergoing TAVR varies and is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. We evaluated the outcomes of complex and high-risk percutaneous coronary interventions (CHIP-PCIs) and TAVR compared with standard PCI and TAVR. Between January 2014 and March 2021, a total of 276 consecutive patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) who underwent TAVR and PCI at 3 centers within Northwell Health were retrospectively reviewed. CHIP-PCI was defined as PCI with one of the following: left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) <30%; left main coronary artery (LMCA)/chronic total occlusion (CTO) intervention; atherectomy; or need for left ventricular (LV) support. One hundred twenty- seven patients (46%) had CHIP-PCI prior to TAVR and 149 patients (54%) had standard PCI. Thirteen percent of CHIP-PCI and 22% of standard PCI cases were done concomitantly with TAVR. CHIP-PCI criteria were met for low EF (19%), LMCA (25%), CTO (3%), LV support (20%), and atherectomy (50%). The types of valves used were similarly divided (49% balloon expandable vs 51% self expanding. Major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular event (MACCE) rate for CHIP-PCI/TAVR was 4.9% at 30 days vs 1.3% for standard PCI/TAVR (P=.09), driven by in-hospital stroke. At 1 year, the rates of MACCE for CHIP-PCI/TAVR remained higher than for standard PCI/TAVR, but was not statistically significant (8.7% vs 4%; P=.06), driven by revascularization. We found no differences between major and/or minor vascular complications. New York Heart Association classification at 1 month was similar (I/II 93% vs 95%; P=.87). Our study suggests that CHIP-PCI can be safely performed in patients with complex CAD and concomitant severe AS.

A Case of Complex Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction Caused by Extension of Type A Aortic Dissection into the Left Main Coronary Artery.

Aortic dissection extending into the left main coronary artery is rare and carries high mortality, especially when resulting in extensive myocardial infarction. Here we report a case of retrograde extension of type A aortic dissection into the left main coronary artery causing ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction managed by complex percutaneous coronary intervention, which resulted in temporary stabilization of the patient. We briefly review current literature on this approach.

Transcatheter heart valve selection in patients with low ejection fraction and aortic stenosis.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of transcatheter heart valve (THV) choice in patients with left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction. BACKGROUND: The management congestive heart failure with combined LV systolic dysfunction and severe aortic stenosis (AS) is challenging, yet transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has emerged as a suitable treatment option in such patients. Head-to-head comparisons among the balloon-expandable (BEV) and self-expandable (SEV) THV remain limited in this subgroup of patients. METHODS: In this retrospective study, we included patients with severe AS with LV systolic dysfunction (LVEF ≤40%) who underwent TAVR at four high volume centers. Two thousand and twenty-eight consecutive patients were analyzed, of which 335 patients met inclusion criteria. One hundred fourty-six patients (43%) received a SEV, and 189 patients (57%) received a BEV. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar except for a higher proportion of females in the SEV group. The primary composite endpoint of in-hospital mortality, moderate or greater paravalvular (PVL), stroke, conversion to open surgery, aortic valve reintervention, and/or need for permanent pacemaker (PPM) was no different among THV choice. There was more PVL in the SEV group, but higher transaortic gradients in the BEV group. Clinical outcomes and quality of life measures were similar up to 1 year follow-up. CONCLUSION: The choice of THV in patients with severe AS and systolic dysfunction must be weighed on a case-by-case basis.

Impact of Chronic Total Occlusions on Outcomes of Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Propensity-Score-Matched Analysis Using the National Inpatient Sample Database.

BACKGROUND: There is limited data on the impact of chronic total occlusions (CTOs) on the outcomes of patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the contemporary era. METHODS: We queried the National Inpatient Sample between October 2015 and December 2017 using the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth revision codes to identify hospitalized AMI patients undergoing PCI. A 1:1 propensity-score matched analysis was performed to compare in-hospital outcomes of patients with and without CTOs. RESULTS: Among 576,760 admissions identified during the study period, 51,225(8.8 %) had CTO and 525,535 (91.1 %) did not. After 1:1 propensity-score matching, each matched group contained 51,210 admissions. In-hospital mortality was significantly higher in the CTO group compared with the non-CTO group (4.7 % vs 3 %, p < 0.0001). In the CTO group, hospital length of stay was longer (median 3 vs 2 days, p = 0.001) and lower percentage of patients were discharged to home (78.8 % vs 81.1 %, p < 0.0001), compared with the non-CTO group. Median cost of hospital stay was also higher in the CTO group compared with the non-CTO group ($20,921 vs $19,856, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: In this propensity-score matched analysis of a large US inpatient database, the presence of CTOs in AMI patients undergoing PCI identified a higher risk cohort with in higher in-hospital mortality, longer hospital length of stay and higher hospitalization cost.

Improved outcomes in patients with severely depressed LVEF undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with contemporary practices.

BACKGROUND: Contemporary practices for hemodynamically supported high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention have evolved over the last decade. This study sought to compare outcomes of the prospective, multicenter, PROTECT III study to historic patients treated with Impella in the PROTECT II randomized controlled trial. METHODS: Of 1,134 patients enrolled in PROTECT III from March 2017 to March 2020, 504 were "PROTECT II-like" (met eligibility for PROTECT II randomized controlled trial) and are referred to as PROTECT III for comparative analysis. Major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), comprising all-cause mortality, stroke/transient ischemic attack, myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularization, were compared at hospital discharge and 90 days. RESULTS: Compared with PROTECT II (N = 216), PROTECT III patients were less often Caucasian (77.1% vs 83.8%, P = .045), with less prior CABG (13.7% vs 39.4%; P < .001) and prior myocardial infarction (40.7% vs 69.3%; P < .001). More PROTECT III patients underwent rotational atherectomy (37.1% vs 14.8%, P < .001) and duration of support was longer (median 1.6 vs 1.3 hours; p<0.001), with greater improvement achieved in myocardial ischemia jeopardy scores (7.0±2.4 vs 4.4±2.9; P < .001) and SYNTAX scores (21.4±10.8 vs 15.7±9.5; P < .001). In-hospital bleeding requiring transfusion was significantly lower in PROTECT III (1.8% vs 9.3%; P < .001), as was procedural hypotension (2.2% vs 10.1%; P < .001) and cardiopulmonary resuscitation or ventricular arrhythmia (1.6% vs 6.9%; P < .001). At 90 days, MACCE was 15.1% and 21.9% in PROTECT III and PROTECT II, respectively (p=0.037). Following propensity score matching, Kaplan-Meier analysis showed improved 90-day MACCE rates in PROTECT III (10.4% vs 16.9%, P = .048). CONCLUSIONS: The PROTECT III study demonstrates improved completeness of revascularization, less bleeding, and improved 90-day clinical outcomes compared to PROTECT II for Impella-supported high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention among patients with severely depressed LVEF.

Five-Year Clinical Outcomes of the COBRA Polyzene F NanoCoated Coronary Stent System.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: The COBRA Polyzene F™ NanoCoated Coronary Stent System (PzF coated stent) stent demonstrated favorable clinical outcomes at 9 months but late results have not been reported. We sought to assess the late safety and effectiveness of the PzF coated stent for treatment of de novo coronary artery lesions. METHODS: Patients with de novo coronary artery lesions meeting eligibility criteria were enrolled in a non-randomized, prospective clinical trial and followed for 5 years. The primary endpoint was target vessel failure (TVF, cardiac death, myocardial infarction [MI], or clinically-driven target vessel revascularization [TVR]) at 9 months. Secondary endpoints included major adverse clinical events (MACE, cardiac death, MI, or clinically driven TLR), clinically driven target lesion revascularization (TLR) and definite or probable stent thrombosis during 5-year follow-up. Endpoints at 5 years were analyzed as cumulative incidence accounting for competing risk of death. RESULTS: Of 296 enrolled patients, 290 (98%) were evaluable at 5 years. By 5 years, MACE had occurred in 61 (21.3%), cardiac death in 11 (4.2%), MI in 25 (8.6%), and TLR in 34 (12.0%) subjects. Between follow-up years 1 and 5, a first MACE occurred in 17 (6.2%), including 10 (4.0%) cardiac death, 4 (1.6%) MI, and 7 (2.9%) TLR events. There were no definite or probable stent thromboses. CONCLUSIONS: The PzF coated stent demonstrated continued safety and effectiveness through 5 years with low to very low incident rates of MACE, MI, TLR and stent thrombosis between 1 and 5 years after stent placement.

Short term outcomes of rotational atherectomy versus orbital atherectomy in patients undergoing complex percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Coronary artery calcification (CAC) is one of the paramount hurdles for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) since it impedes stent delivery and complete expansion. This study intended to evaluate the short-term clinical and procedural outcomes comparing rotational atherectomy (RA) and orbital atherectomy (OA) in patients with heavily calcified coronary lesions undergoing PCI. Design: This systematic review and meta-analysis included all head-to-head published comparisons of coronary RA versus OA. Procedural endpoints and post-procedural clinical outcomes (30 days/in-hospital), were compared. RevMan 5.3 software was used for data analysis. Results: Seven retrospective observational investigations with a total of 4623 patients, including 3203 patients in the RA group and 1420 patients in the OA group, were incorporated. Compared with OA, the RA group was associated with a higher incidence of myocardial infarction at short-term follow-up (OR: 1.56, 95% CI: 1.07-2.29, p = .02, I2 = 0%). No difference was noted among other short-term post-procedural clinical outcomes including all-cause mortality, target vessel revascularization, or major adverse cardiac events. Among procedural complications, RA was associated with reduced coronary artery dissection and arterial perforation. Increased fluoroscopy time was observed in the RA cohort as compared with OA (MD: 4.78, 95% CI: 2.25-7.30, p = .0002, I2 = 80%). Conclusion: RA was associated with fewer vascular complications, but at a cost of higher incidence of myocardial infarction and higher fluoroscopy time compared with OA, at short term follow-up. OA is a safe and effective alternative for the management of CAC.

Northwell intracoronary brachytherapy for the treatment of recurrent drug eluting stent in-stent restenosis (NITDI study group).

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to report on safety, short-term and long-term clinical efficacy following intracoronary brachytherapy (ICBT) for restenosis (ISR) in patients with drug eluting stents (DES). BACKGROUND: ICBT is an effective treatment for ISR of bare metal stents (BMS) but its utilization has waned due to the advent of DES. ISR following DES occurs at a frequency of 8% or greater. METHOD: A retrospective analysis was performed on patients treated on an institutional review board (IRB) approved protocol using ICBT for DES ISR between January 2011 and October 2016. All patients were followed for 24 months for procedural complications, mortality, clinical ISR/target lesion revascularization (TLR) and stroke. RESULTS: A total of 290 patients were identified with a mean age of 66.6 years. All of them had high rates of typical coronary artery disease risk factors. Our primary outcome, composite of in-hospital mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), safety outcomes and procedural failure was noted in 1(0.3%) patient who had a MI. No other secondary outcome was noted in-hospital. At 1-year follow up, 12.4% patients had ISR, 1.7% patients died, and 1 (0.3%) had ischemic stroke. At 2-year, 14.7% had ISR, and total 6 (2.1%) patients had MI. CONCLUSION: ICBT demonstrates excellent technical success rates for treatment, safety, and reasonable efficacy over 2-years to be free from recurrent clinical ISR. This study represents the largest ICBT data for DES ISR to date among very complex lesion subsets, however, more prospective data will be needed to determine the optimal patient for treatment.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on STEMI care: An expanded analysis from the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of COVID-19 pandemic migitation measures on of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) care. BACKGROUND: We previously reported a 38% decline in cardiac catheterization activations during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic mitigation measures. This study extends our early observations using a larger sample of STEMI programs representative of different US regions with the inclusion of more contemporary data. METHODS: Data from 18 hospitals or healthcare systems in the US from January 2019 to April 2020 were collecting including number activations for STEMI, the number of activations leading to angiography and primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI), and average door to balloon (D2B) times. Two periods, January 2019-February 2020 and March-April 2020, were defined to represent periods before (BC) and after (AC) initiation of pandemic mitigation measures, respectively. A generalized estimating equations approach was used to estimate the change in response variables at AC from BC. RESULTS: Compared to BC, the AC period was characterized by a marked reduction in the number of activations for STEMI (29%, 95% CI:18-38, p < .001), number of activations leading to angiography (34%, 95% CI: 12-50, p = .005) and number of activations leading to PPCI (20%, 95% CI: 11-27, p < .001). A decline in STEMI activations drove the reductions in angiography and PPCI volumes. Relative to BC, the D2B times in the AC period increased on average by 20%, 95%CI (-0.2 to 44, p = .05). CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 Pandemic has adversely affected many aspects of STEMI care, including timely access to the cardiac catheterization laboratory for PPCI.

Paradigm Shifts in Cardiac Care: Lessons Learned From COVID-19 at a Large New York Health System.

The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has overwhelmed healthcare systems around the world, resulting in morbidity, mortality, and a dramatic economic downturn In the United States. Urgent responses to the pandemic halted routine hospital workflow in an effort to increase hospital capacity, maintain staffing, and ration protective gear. Most notably, New York saw the largest surge of COVID-19 cases nationwide. Healthcare personnel and physician leaders at Northwell Health, the largest healthcare system in New York, have worked together to successfully implement operational changes resulting in a paradigm shift in cardiac care delivery. In this manuscript, we detail specific protocol adjustments made in our cardiology department, cardiology service line, and healthcare system in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic. We discuss the sustainability of this shift moving forward and the opportunity to optimize care for cardiovascular patients in the post COVID-19 era.

Hot topics in interventional cardiology: Proceedings from the society for cardiovascular angiography and interventions 2020 think tank.

The society for cardiovascular angiography and interventions (SCAI) think tank is a collaborative venture that brings together interventional cardiologists, administrative partners, and select members of the cardiovascular industry community for high-level field-wide discussions. The 2020 think tank was organized into four parallel sessions reflective of the field of interventional cardiology: (a) coronary intervention, (b) endovascular medicine, (c) structural heart disease, and (d) congenital heart disease (CHD). Each session was moderated by a senior content expert and co-moderated by a member of SCAI's emerging leader mentorship program. This document presents the proceedings to the wider cardiovascular community in order to enhance participation in this discussion, create additional dialogue from a broader base, and thereby aid SCAI and the industry community in developing specific action items to move these areas forward.

North American COVID-19 ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (NACMI) registry: Rationale, design, and implications.

The novel coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has resulted in a global pandemic. Patients with cardiovascular risk factors or established cardiovascular disease are more likely to experience severe or critical COVID-19 illness and myocardial injury is a key extra-pulmonary manifestation. These patients frequently present with ST-elevation on an electrocardiogram (ECG) due to multiple etiologies including obstructive, non-obstructive, and/or angiographically normal coronary arteries. The incidence of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) mimics in COVID-19-positive hospitalized patients, and the association with morbidity and mortality is unknown. Understanding the natural history and appropriate management of COVID-19 patients presenting with ST elevation is essential to inform patient management decisions and protect healthcare workers. Methods: The Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) and The Canadian Association of Interventional Cardiology (CAIC) in conjunction with the American College of Cardiology Interventional Council have collaborated to create a multi-center observational registry, NACMI. This registry will enroll confirmed COVID-19 patients and persons under investigation (PUI) with new ST-segment elevation or new onset left bundle branch block (LBBB) on the ECG with clinical suspicion of myocardial ischemia. We will compare demographics, clinical findings, outcomes and management of these patients with a historical control group of over 15,000 consecutive STEMI activation patients from the Midwest STEMI Consortium using propensity matching. The primary clinical outcome will be in- hospital major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) defined as composite of all-cause mortality, stroke, recurrent MI, and repeat unplanned revascularization in COVID-19 confirmed or PUI. Secondary outcomes will include the following: reporting of etiologies of ST Elevation; cardiovascular mortality due to myocardial infarction, cardiac arrest and /or shock; individual components of the primary outcome; composite primary outcome at 1 year; as well as ECG and angiographic characteristics. Conclusion: The multicenter NACMI registry will collect data regarding ST elevation on ECG in COVID-19 patients to determine the etiology and associated clinical outcomes. The collaboration and speed with which this registry has been created, refined, and promoted serves as a template for future research endeavors.

Management of acute myocardial infarction during the COVID-19 pandemic: A Consensus Statement from the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), and the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP).

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 US population remains unknown with risk of asymptomatic spread. This document addresses the care of these patients focusing on (a) varied clinical presentations; (b) appropriate personal protection equipment (PPE) for health care workers; (c) the roles of the emergency department, emergency medical system, and the cardiac catheterization laboratory (CCL); and (4) regional STEMI systems of care. During the COVID-19 pandemic, primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains the standard of care for STEMI patients at PCI-capable hospitals when it can be provided in a timely manner, 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.

Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Position Statement From the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), and the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP).

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.