Impact of COVID-19 on percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction

Changing pattern of admissions for acute myocardial infarction in India during the COVID-19 pandemic

AIM

Studies on the changes in the presentation and management of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) during the COVID-19 pandemic from low- and middle-income countries are limited. We sought to determine the changes in the number of admissions, management practices, and outcomes of AMI during the pandemic period in India.

METHODS & RESULTS

In this two-timepoint cross-sectional study involving 187 hospitals across India, patients admitted with AMI between 15th March to 15th June in 2020 were compared with those admitted during the corresponding period of 2019. We included 41,832 consecutive adults with AMI. Admissions during the pandemic period (n = 16414) decreased by 35·4% as compared to the corresponding period in 2019 (n = 25418). We observed significant heterogeneity in this decline across India. The weekly average decrease in AMI admissions in 2020 correlated negatively with the number of COVID cases (r = -0·48; r2 = 0·2), but strongly correlated with the stringency of lockdown index (r = 0·95; r2 = 0·90). On a multi-level logistic regression, admissions were lower in 2020 with older age categories, tier 1 cities, and centers with high patient volume. Adjusted utilization rate of coronary angiography, and percutaneous coronary intervention decreased by 11·3%, and 5·9% respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The magnitude of reduction in AMI admissions across India was not uniform. The nature, time course, and the patient demographics were different compared to reports from other countries, suggesting a significant impact due to the lockdown. These findings have important implications in managing AMI during the pandemic.

[Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on ST - elevation myocardial infarction management in a reference center of northern Peru]

Objective

To evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the ST-Elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) management in a reference center of northern Peru.

Methods

Observational, analytical, retrospective cohort-type study, derivated from the Acute Coronary Syndrome registry of the Almanzor Aguinaga Asenjo National Hospital. The characteristics of the patients with STEMI and their 30-day outcomes were compared in 02 cohorts according to the time of medical care: prior to the pandemic or during the pandemic.

Results

During the COVID-19 pandemic, hospitalizations for STEMI decreased by 53%, there was a greater use of fibrinolysis to the detriment of primary angioplasty, with increases in the time of first medical contact (100 vs. 240 minutes, p = 0.006) and ischemic time to percutaneous coronary intervention (900 vs. 2880 minutes, p <0.001). This generated a higher frequency of post-infarction heart failure (21.1% vs. 46.7%, p = 0.002) and a lower left ventricular ejection fraction at discharge (49.2 +/- 8.6 vs 44.8 +/- 9.3, p = 0.009), without an increase in in-hospital cardiovascular mortality.

Conclusions

The COVID-19 has had a negative impact on the treatment of patients with STEMI. We found less hospitalizations, prolonged reperfusion times, and higher frequency of post-infarction heart failure and lower left ventricular ejection fraction at discharge.

Natriuretic peptide level at heart failure diagnosis and risk of hospitalisation and death in England 2004-2018

Objective

Heart failure (HF) is a malignant condition requiring urgent treatment. Guidelines recommend natriuretic peptide (NP) testing in primary care to prioritise referral for specialist diagnostic assessment. We aimed to assess association of baseline NP with hospitalisation and mortality in people with newly diagnosed HF.

Methods

Population-based cohort study of 40 007 patients in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink in England with a new HF diagnosis (48% men, mean age 78.5 years). We used linked primary and secondary care data between 1 January 2004 and 31 December 2018 to report one-year hospitalisation and 1-year, 5-year and 10-year mortality by NP level.

Results

22 085 (55%) participants were hospitalised in the year following diagnosis. Adjusted odds of HF-related hospitalisation in those with a high NP (NT-proBNP >2000 pg/mL) were twofold greater (OR 2.26 95% CI 1.98 to 2.59) than a moderate NP (NT-proBNP 400–2000 pg/mL). All-cause mortality rates in the high NP group were 27%, 62% and 82% at 1, 5 and 10 years, compared with 19%, 50% and 77%, respectively, in the moderate NP group and, in a competing risks model, risk of HF-related death was 50% higher at each timepoint. Median time between NP test and HF diagnosis was 101 days (IQR 19–581).

Conclusions

High baseline NP is associated with increased HF-related hospitalisation and poor survival. While healthcare systems remain under pressure from the impact of COVID-19, research to test novel strategies to prevent hospitalisation and improve outcomes—such as a mandatory two-week HF diagnosis pathway—is urgently needed.

Cardiac operations and interventions during the COVID-19 pandemic: a nationwide perspective

AIMS

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a decline in hospitalizations for non-COVID-19-related conditions. We explored the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cardiac operations and interventions undertaken in England.

METHODS AND RESULTS

An administrative database covering hospital activity for England, the Health Episodes Statistics, was used to assess a total of 286 697 hospitalizations for cardiac operations and interventions, as well as 227 257 hospitalizations for myocardial infarction (MI) and 453 799 for heart failure (HF) from 7 January 2019 to 26 July 2020. Over the 3 months of 'lockdown', total numbers and mean reductions in weekly rates [n (-%)], compared with the same time period in 2019, were: coronary artery bypass grafting [-2507 (-64%)]; percutaneous coronary intervention [-5245 (-28%)]; surgical [-1324 (-41%)] and transcatheter [-284 (-21%)] aortic valve replacement; mitral valve replacement; implantation of pacemakers [-6450 (-44%)], cardiac resynchronization therapy with [-356 (-42%)] or without [-491 (-46%)] defibrillation devices, and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators [-501 (-45%)]; atrial fibrillation ablation [-1902 (-83%)], and other ablations [-1712 (-64%)] (all P < 0.001). Over this period, there were 21 038 fewer procedures than in the reference period in 2019 (P < 0.001). These changes paralleled reductions in hospitalizations for MI [-10 794 (-27%)] and HF [-63 058 (-28%)] (both P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to substantial reductions in the number of cardiac operations and interventions undertaken. An alternative strategy for healthcare delivery to patients with cardiac conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic is urgently needed.

Impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on the care of patients with acute and chronic aortic conditions

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on acute and elective thoracic and abdominal aortic procedures.

METHODS

Forty departments shared their data on acute and elective thoracic and abdominal aortic procedures between January and May 2020 and January and May 2019 in Europe, Asia and the USA. Admission rates as well as delay from onset of symptoms to referral were compared.

RESULTS

No differences in the number of acute thoracic and abdominal aortic procedures were observed between 2020 and the reference period in 2019 [incidence rates ratio (IRR): 0.96, confidence interval (CI) 0.89-1.04; P = 0.39]. Also, no difference in the time interval from acute onset of symptoms to referral was recorded (<12 h 32% vs > 12 h 68% in 2020, < 12 h 34% vs > 12 h 66% in 2019 P = 0.29). Conversely, a decline of 35% in elective procedures was seen (IRR: 0.81, CI 0.76-0.87; P < 0.001) with substantial differences between countries and the most pronounced decline in Italy (-40%, P < 0.001). Interestingly, in Switzerland, an increase in the number of elective cases was observed (+35%, P = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

There was no change in the number of acute thoracic and abdominal aortic cases and procedures during the initial wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, whereas the case load of elective operations and procedures decreased significantly. Patients with acute aortic syndromes presented despite COVID-19 and were managed according to current guidelines. Further analysis is required to prove that deferral of elective cases had no impact on premature mortality.

COVID-19 pandemic and coronary angiography for ST-elevation myocardial infarction, use of mechanical support and mechanical complications in Canada; a Canadian Association of Interventional Cardiology national survey

Background

As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic first wave, reductions in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) invasive care, ranging from 23% to 76%, have been reported from various countries. Whether this change had any impact on coronary angiography (CA) volume or on mechanical support device use for STEMI and post-STEMI mechanical complications in Canada is unknown.

Methods

We administered a Canada-wide survey to all cardiac catheterization laboratory directors, seeking the volume of CA use for STEMI performed during the period from March 1 2020 to May 31, 2020 (pandemic period), and during 2 control periods (March 1, 2019 to May 31, 2019 and March 1, 2018 to May 31, 2018). The number of left ventricular support devices used, as well as the number of ventricular septal defects and papillary muscle rupture cases diagnosed, was also recorded. We also assessed whether the number of COVID-19 cases recorded in each province was associated with STEMI-related CA volume.

Results

A total of 41 of 42 Canadian catheterization laboratories (98%) provided data. There was a modest but statistically significant 16% reduction (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 0.84; 95% confidence interval 0.80-0.87) in CA for STEMI during the first wave of the pandemic, compared to control periods. IRR was not associated with provincial COVID-19 caseload. We observed a 26% reduction (IRR 0.74; 95% confidence interval 0.61-0.89) in the use of intra-aortic balloon pump use for STEMI. Use of an Impella pump and mechanical complications from STEMI were exceedingly rare.

Conclusions

We observed a modest 16% decrease in use of CA for STEMI during the pandemic first wave in Canada, lower than the level reported in other countries. Provincial COVID-19 caseload did not influence this reduction.

Outcomes of Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Admitted During COVID-19 Pandemic Lockdown in Germany - Results of a Single Center Prospective Cohort Study

Objective: Since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare professionals reported declining numbers of patients admitted with ST-segment myocardial infarction (STEMI) associated with increased in-hospital morbidity and mortality. However, the effect of lockdown on outcomes of STEMI patients admitted during the COVID-19 crisis has not been prospectively evaluated.

Methods: A prospective, observational study on STEMI patients admitted to our tertiary care center during the COVID-19 pandemic was conducted. Outcomes of patients admitted during lockdown were compared to those patients admitted before and after pandemic-related lockdown.

Results: A total of 147 patients were enrolled in our study, including 57 patients in the pre-lockdown group (November 1, 2019 to March 20, 2020), 16 patients in the lockdown group (March 21 to April 19, 2020), and 74 patients in the post-lockdown group (April 20 to September 30, 2020). Patients admitted during lockdown had significantly longer time to first medical contact, longer door-to-needle-time, higher serum troponin T levels, worse left ventricular end-diastolic pressure, and higher need for circulatory support. After a median follow-up of 142 days, survival was significantly worse in STEMI patients of the lockdown group (log-rank: p = 0.0035).

Conclusions: This is the first prospective study on outcomes of STEMI patients admitted during public lockdown amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Our results suggest that lockdown might deteriorate outcomes of STEMI patients. Public health strategies to constrain spread of COVID-19, such as lockdown, have to be accompanied by distinct public instructions to ensure timely medical care in acute diseases such as STEMI.

COVID-19 and changes in activity and treatment of ST elevation MI from a UK cardiac centre

BACKGROUND

The international healthcare response to COVID-19 has been driven by epidemiological data related to case numbers and case fatality rate. Second order effects have been less well studied. This study aimed to characterise the changes in emergency activity of a high-volume cardiac catheterisation centre and to cautiously model any excess indirect morbidity and mortality.

METHOD

Retrospective cohort study of patients admitted with acute coronary syndrome fulfilling criteria for the heart attack centre (HAC) pathway at St. Bartholomew's hospital, UK. Electronic data were collected for the study period March 16th - May 16th 2020 inclusive and stored on a dedicated research server. Standard governance procedures were observed in line with the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society audit.

RESULTS

There was a 28% fall in the number of primary percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) for ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) during the study period (111 vs. 154) and 36% fewer activations of the HAC pathway (312 vs. 485), compared to the same time period averaged across three preceding years. In the context of 'missing STEMIs', the excess harm attributable to COVID-19 could result in an absolute increase of 1.3% in mortality, 1.9% in nonfatal MI and 4.5% in recurrent ischemia.

CONCLUSIONS

The emergency activity of a high-volume PCI centre was significantly reduced for STEMI during the peak of the first wave of COVID-19. Our data can be used as an exemplar to help future modelling within cardiovascular workstreams to refine aggregate estimates of the impact of COVID-19 and inform targeted policy action.

The Number of Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction Decreased and Door-to-Balloon Time Delayed in COVID-19

BACKGROUND

At present, COVID-19 is sweeping the world, and all countries are actively responding. During the COVID-19 epidemic, the treatment of patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) may be affected.

METHODS

We reviewed data of patients with AMI from January 23 to April 23, 2020 (2020), and January 23 to April 23, 2019 (2019), who were admitted to two hospitals from Southern China. We collected clinical characteristics, comorbidities, treatment, prognosis, and key time segments to analyze.

RESULTS

The total number of patients that had been diagnosed with AMI in the two hospitals was 218 in 2020 and 260 in 2019. The number of AMI patients that were admitted to hospitals per day decreased in 2020. The percentage of patients with AMI who refused hospitalization in 2020 was significantly higher than that in 2019 (5.0% vs 1.5%, p=0.028). There is no statistical difference in symptoms of the first medical contact (S2FMC) time between 2020 and 2019 (p=0.552). Door-to-balloon (D2B) time of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients who were treated with a primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) in 2020 was 79 (63.75-105.25) mins, while D2B time in 2019 was 57.5 (41.5-76.5) mins, which was statistically different from the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 had an impact on the number of AMI patients who were admitted to hospitals and the time of treatment. During the COVID-19 epidemic, the number of AMI patients that were admitted to hospitals per day was decreased, while the percentage of AMI patients that refused therapy in these two hospitals increased, and the D2B time of STEMI patients was also delayed.

Sustainable Resumption of Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory Procedures, and the Importance of Testing, During Endemic COVID-19

PURPOSE

As second and third waves of the COVID-19 pandemic challenge healthcare in North America and Europe once again, we analyze the impact of the first wave on routine elective cardiovascular care, and the differential COVID risk emerging within our patient groups and staff.

PERSPECTIVE

We describe the need to sustainably resume, and temporarily expand, routine elective cardiac services in the face of resurgent COVID-19. Some, but not all, cardiac patient groups are particularly vulnerable to adverse outcomes following COVID-19 infection. We explore mitigation measures at the institutional level to increase resilience within cardiac services to enable them to operate deep into subsequent waves of COVID infection which place unprecedented demands on intensive care infrastructure. As measures to eradicate the virus appear to have failed in many countries, and vaccine roll-out will take many months we take the view that the threat imposed by endemic COVID-19 alters the way elective procedural care should be offered to cardiovascular patients.

CONCLUSION

Our patients are at definite risk from their cardiovascular disease, and a return to suspension of proven prognostic interventional treatments on an elective basis - the default for the first wave - must be avoided at all costs.

[COVID-19 pandemic : Effects on clinical care of cardiovascular patients in spring 2020]

Die COVID-19(„coronavirus disease 2019“)-Pandemie hat zu einer Fokussierung der Akutmedizin auf die Versorgung von Patienten mit SARS-CoV-2(„severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2“)-infizierten Patienten geführt – mit Auswirkungen auf alle anderen medizinischen Gebiete. In den Monaten von März bis Mai 2020 kam es zu einem Rückgang der Krankenhausaufnahmen sowohl für elektive kardiologische Prozeduren als auch für akute kardiologische Erkrankungen. Die Anzahl von Patienten mit akutem Herzinfarkt, insbesondere mit Nicht-ST-Strecken-Hebungs-Infarkt, ist während dieser Monate zurückgegangen, und es zeigte sich auch teilweise eine Zunahme der Zeit zwischen Symptombeginn und Krankenhausaufnahme. In einigen Untersuchungen wurde auch eine Erhöhung der infarktbezogenen Mortalität beobachtet. Die Gründe sind vielfältig und beinhalten eine Furcht der Patienten vor dem Krankenhausaufenthalt mit möglicher Ansteckung mit SARS-CoV‑2, Missdeutung der Symptome und Fokussierung des Gesundheitssystems auf die Pandemie. Zusätzlich kann SARS-CoV‑2 zu einer höheren Thromboseneigung führen und damit schwerere Verläufe eines Myokardinfarkts induzieren.

Consultations Decline for Stroke, Transient Ischemic Attack, and Myocardial Infarction during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Germany

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic raises the concern that other non-COVID conditions will be affected by a decline in care. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the decline in ambulatory presentations for vascular events (stroke, transient ischemic attack [TIA], and myocardial infarction [MI]) during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

Patients with a diagnosis of ischemic stroke, TIA, or MI documented anonymously in 1,262 general practices in Germany were included. We studied the differences between 2019 and 2020 (between April and June) in terms of rates and baseline characteristics by comparing monthly absolute frequencies.

RESULTS

A total of 3,496 patients with stroke (mean age: 72.2 years), 1,608 patients with TIA (mean age: 71.5 years), and 2,385 patients with MI (mean age: 66.8 years) were identified between April and June 2020, indicating a decrease of 10% (stroke), 16% (TIA), and 9% (MI) compared to 2019. For patients with stroke, the decrease in men was 13% (women: -6%) but reached 17% in the age category 51-60 years. For MI, the decrease was only obvious in males (14%). The largest decrease in stroke (-17%) and MI (-19%) was noted in April, while that for TIA occurred in May (-22%). In June for all 3 conditions, the previous year's level was achieved. Only in TIA, the age differs between 2019 and 2020 (mean age: 69.9 vs. 71.5 years; p < 0.05). In patients with stroke and MI, the proportions of men were lower in 2019 than in 2020 (stroke: 54.8-50.5%, p < 0.05 and MI: 64-60.2%, p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Although the decline in the number of patients presenting with stroke, TIA, and MI was not as noticeable in the ambulatory sector as it was in the area of emergency hospital-based care, our data indicate that the COVID-19 pandemic affected all sectors within the medical care system.

COVID-19 pandemic is associated with mechanical complications in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction

OBJECTIVE

Although there are regional reports that the COVID-19 pandemic is associated with a reduction in acute myocardial infarction presentations and primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) procedures, little is known about the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mechanical complications resulting from ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and mortality.

METHODS

This single-centre retrospective cohort study analysed presentations, incidence of mechanical complications, and mortality in patients with STEMI before and after a state of emergency was declared due to the COVID-19 pandemic by the Japanese government on 7 April 2020.

RESULTS

We analysed 359 patients with STEMI hospitalised before the declaration and 63 patients hospitalised after the declaration. The proportion of patients with late presentation was significantly higher after the declaration than before (25.4% vs 14.2%, p=0.03). The incidence of late presentation was significantly higher during the COVID-19 pandemic than before (incidence rate ratio (IRR), 2.41; 95% CI, 1.37 to 4.05; p=0.001, even after adjusting for month (IRR, 2.61; 95% CI, 1.33 to 5.13; p<0.01). Primary PCI was performed significantly less often after the declaration than before (68.3% vs 82.5%, p=0.009). The mechanical complication resulting from STEMI occurred in 13 of 359 (3.6%) patients before the declaration and 9 of 63 (14.3%) patients after the declaration (p<0.001). However, the incidence of in-hospital death (before, 6.2% vs after, 6.4%, p=0.95) was comparable.

CONCLUSIONS

Following the COVID-19 pandemic, an increased incidence of mechanical complications resulting from STEMI was observed. Instructing people to stay at home, without effectively educating them to immediately seek medical attention when suffering symptoms of a heart attack, may worsen outcomes in patients with STEMI.

Hospitalization deficit of in- and outpatient cases with cardiovascular diseases and utilization of cardiological interventions during the COVID-19 pandemic: Insights from the German-wide helios hospital network

Background

Treatment numbers of various cardiovascular diseases were reduced throughout the early phase of the ongoing COVID‐19 pandemic. Aim of this study was to (a) expand previous study periods to examine the long‐term course of hospital admission numbers, (b) provide data for in‐ and outpatient care pathways, and (c) illustrate changes of numbers of cardiovascular procedures.

Methods and Results

Administrative data of patients with ICD‐10‐encoded primary diagnoses of cardiovascular diseases (heart failure, cardiac arrhythmias, ischemic heart disease, valvular heart disease, hypertension, peripheral vascular disease) and in‐ or outpatient treatment between March, 13th 2020 and September, 10th 2020 were analyzed and compared with 2019 data. Numbers of cardiovascular procedures were calculated using OPS‐codes. The cumulative hospital admission deficit (CumAD) was computed as the difference between expected and observed admissions for every week in 2020. In total, 80 hospitals contributed 294 361 patient cases to the database without relevant differences in baseline characteristics between the studied periods. There was a CumAD of −10% to −16% at the end of the study interval in 2020 for all disease groups driven to varying degrees by both reductions of in‐ and outpatient case numbers. The number of performed interventions was significantly reduced for all examined procedures (catheter ablations: −10%; cardiac electronic device implantations: −7%; percutaneous cardiovascular interventions: −9%; cardiovascular surgery: −15%).

Conclusions

This study provides data on the long‐term development of cardiovascular patient care during the COVID‐19 pandemic demonstrating a significant CumAD for several cardiovascular diseases and a concomitant performance deficit of cardiovascular interventions.

Socioeconomic status and cardiovascular health in the COVID-19 pandemic

The goals of this review are to evaluate the impact of socioeconomic (SE) status on the general health and cardiovascular health of individuals during the COVID-19 pandemic and also discuss the measures to address disparity. SE status is a strong predictor of premature morbidity and mortality within general health. A lower SE status also has implications of increased cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality and poorer CVD risk factor profiles. CVD comorbidity is associated with a higher case severity and mortality rate from COVID-19, with both CVD and COVID-19 sharing important risk factors. The COVID-19 pandemic has adversely affected people of a lower SE status and of ethnic minority group, who in the most deprived regions are suffering double the mortality rate of the least deprived. The acute stress, economic recession and quarantine restrictions in the wake of COVID-19 are also predicted to cause a decline in mental health. This could pose substantial increase to CVD incidence, particularly with acute pathologies such as stroke, acute coronary syndrome and cardiogenic shock among lower SE status individuals and vulnerable elderly populations. Efforts to tackle SE status and CVD may aid in reducing avoidable deaths. The implementation of 'upstream' interventions and policies demonstrates promise in achieving the greatest population impact, aiming to protect and empower individuals. Specific measures may involve risk factor targeting restrictions on the availability and advertisement of tobacco, alcohol and high-fat and salt content food, and targeting SE disparity with healthy and secure workplaces.

The Impact of COVID-19 on In-Hospital Outcomes of ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Patients

Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) is one of the important clinical procedures that have been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. In this study, we aimed to assess the incidence and impact of COVID-19 on in-hospital clinical outcome of ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients managed with PPCI. This observational retrospective study was conducted on consecutive STEMI patients who presented to the International Cardiac Center (ICC) hospital, Alexandria, Egypt between 1 February and 31 October 2020. A group of STEMI patients presented during the same period in 2019 was also assessed (control group) and data was used for comparison. The inclusion criteria were established diagnosis of STEMI requiring PPCI.A total of 634 patients were included in the study. During the COVID-19 period, the number of PPCI procedures was reduced by 25.7% compared with previous year (mean 30.0 ± 4.01 vs. 40.4 ± 5.3 case/month) and the time from first medical contact to Needle (FMC-to-N) was longer (125.0 ± 53.6 vs. 52.6 ± 22.8 min, p = 0.001). Also, during COVID-19, the in-hospital mortality was higher (7.4 vs. 4.6%, p = 0.036) as was the incidence of re-infarction (12.2 vs. 7.7%, p = 0.041) and the need for revascularization (15.9 vs. 10.7%, p = 0.046). The incidence of heart failure, stroke, and bleeding was not different between groups, but hospital stay was longer during COVID-19 (6.85 ± 4.22 vs. 3.5 ± 2.3 day, p = 0.0025). Conclusion: At the ICC, COVID-19 pandemic contributed significantly to the PPCI management of STEMI patients with decreased number and delayed procedures. COVID-19 was also associated with higher in-hospital mortality, rate of re-infarction, need for revascularization, and longer hospital stay.

Outcomes of non-COVID-19 critically ill patients during the COVID-19 pandemic : A retrospective propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) disrupts routine care and alters treatment pathways in every medical specialty, including intensive care medicine, which has been at the core of the pandemic response. The impact of the pandemic is inevitably not limited to patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and their outcomes; however, the impact of COVID-19 on intensive care has not yet been analyzed.

METHODS

The objective of this propensity score-matched study was to compare the clinical outcomes of non-COVID-19 critically ill patients with the outcomes of prepandemic patients. Critically ill, non-COVID-19 patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) during the first wave of the pandemic were matched with patients admitted in the previous year. Mortality, length of stay, and rate of readmission were compared between the two groups after matching.

RESULTS

A total of 211 critically ill SARS-CoV‑2 negative patients admitted between 13 March 2020 and 16 May 2020 were matched to 211 controls, selected from a matching pool of 1421 eligible patients admitted to the ICU in 2019. After matching, the outcomes were not significantly different between the two groups: ICU mortality was 5.2% in 2019 and 8.5% in 2020, p = 0.248, while intrahospital mortality was 10.9% in 2019 and 14.2% in 2020, p = 0.378. The median ICU length of stay was similar in 2019: 4 days (IQR 2-6) compared to 2020: 4 days (IQR 2-7), p = 0.196. The rate of ICU readmission was 15.6% in 2019 and 10.9% in 2020, p = 0.344.

CONCLUSION

In this retrospective single center study, mortality, ICU length of stay, and rate of ICU readmission did not differ significantly between patients admitted to the ICU during the implementation of hospital-wide COVID-19 contingency planning and patients admitted to the ICU before the pandemic.

Therapeutic Implications of COVID-19 for the Interventional Cardiologist

Although COVID-19 is viewed primarily as a respiratory disease, cardiovascular risk factors and disease are prevalent among infected patients and are associated with worse outcomes. In addition, among multiple extra-pulmonary manifestations, there has been an increasing recognition of specific cardiovascular complications of COVID-19. Despite this, in the initial stages of the pandemic there was evidence of a reduction in patients presenting to acute cardiovascular services. In this masterclass review, with the aid of 2 exemplar cases, we will focus on the important therapeutic implications of COVID-19 for interventional cardiologists. We summarize the existing evidence base regarding the varied cardiovascular presentations seen in COVID-19 positive patients and the prognostic importance and potential mechanisms of acute myocardial injury in this setting. Importantly, through the use of a systematic review of the literature, we focus our discussion on the observed higher rates of coronary thrombus burden in patients with COVID-19 and acute coronary syndromes.

Management of Acute Coronary Syndromes During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic: Deviations from Guidelines and Pragmatic Considerations for Patients and Healthcare Workers

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is forcing cardiology departments to rapidly adapt existing clinical guidelines to a new reality and this is especially the case for acute coronary syndrome pathways. In this focused review, the authors discuss how COVID-19 is affecting acute cardiology care and propose pragmatic guideline modifications for the diagnosis and management of acute coronary syndrome patients, particularly around the appropriateness of invasive strategies as well as length of hospital stay. The authors also discuss the use of personal protective equipment for healthcare workers in cardiology. Based on shared global experiences and growing peer-reviewed literature, it is possible to put in place modified acute coronary syndrome treatment pathways to offer safe pragmatic decisions to patients and staff.

Delays in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Care During the COVID-19 Lockdown: An Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Management of ST-elevated myocardial infarction (STEMI) necessitates rapid reperfusion. Delays prolong myocardial ischemia and increase the risk of complications, including death. The COVID-19 pandemic may have impacted STEMI management. We evaluated the relative volume of hospitalizations and clinical time intervals within a regional STEMI system.

METHODS

494 patients with STEMI were grouped into pre-lockdown, lockdown and re-opening cohorts. Clinical, temporal and outcome data were collected and compared between groups for both urban and rural patients, receiving primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and pharmacoinvasive revascularization, respectively. Data was compared to a 10-year historical comparator.

RESULTS

During pre-lockdown there was 238 cases versus 193 in lockdown; a 19.0% reduction in volume. When lockdown was compared to the median caseload from a 10-year historical cohort, a 19.8% reduction was observed. For patients treated with primary PCI during lockdown, median symptom-to-balloon time increased by 44-minutes [217 (IQR 157-387) vs. 261 (160-659) minutes; p=0.03]; driven by an increase in median symptom-to-door time of 41-minutes [136 (IQR 80-267) vs. 177 (IQR 90-569) minutes; p<0.01]. Only patients transferred from non-PCI facilities demonstrated an increase in door-to-reperfusion time [116 (IQR 93-150) vs. 139 (IQR 100-199) minutes; p<0.01]. More patients had left ventricular dysfunction during the lockdown [35% vs. 44%; p=0.04], but there was no difference in mortality.

CONCLUSION

During the COVID-19 lockdown, fewer patients presented with STEMI. Time-to-reperfusion was significantly prolonged and appeared driven predominantly by patient-level and transfer delays. Public education and systems-level changes will be integral to STEMI care during the second wave of COVID-19.

Cardiogenic shock due to acute severe ischemic mitral regurgitation

The reduction in patients presenting with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) during the COVID19 crisis could have resulted from fears about developing COVID-19 infection in hospital. Patients who delay presenting with STEMI are more likely to develop mechanical complications, including acute ischemic mitral regurgitation (MR). We present a 69-year-old women with an inferior STEMI and cardiogenic shock due to acute ischemic MR who delayed presenting to hospital due to the fear of COVID-19. Early identification of this mechanical complication using transthoracic echocardiography in the Emergency Department enabled the team to target her optimisation. Ultimately these patients require urgent surgery to repair the mitral valve and revascularize the myocardium but they are often too unwell to undergo surgery and even when it is feasible the outcomes are poor.