Consequences of canceling elective invasive cardiac procedures during Covid-19 outbreak

Differential Mortality Among Heart Failure Patients Across Different COVID-19 Surges in New York City

ABSTRACT

Learning from the healthcare system's response to the COVID-19 pandemic is essential to better prepare for potential future crises. We sought to assess mortality rates for patients admitted for acute decompensated heart failure (HF) and to analyze which factors demonstrated a statistically significant correlation with this primary endpoint. We performed a retrospective analysis of patients hospitalized with a primary diagnosis of acute decompensated HF within the New York City Health and Hospitals 11-hospital system across the different COVID surge periods. Mortality information was collected in 4,405 participants (mean [SD] age 70.54 [14.44] years, 1885 [42.87%] female).The highest mortality existed in the first surge (9.02%), then improved to near prepandemic levels (3.65%) in the second (3.91%) and third surges (5.94%, p < 0.0001). In-hospital mortality inversely correlated with receipt of a COVID-19 vaccination, but had no correlation with left ventricular ejection fraction or the number of vaccination doses. Mortality for acute decompensated HF patients improved after the first surge, suggesting that hospitals adequately adapted to provide quality care. As future infectious outbreaks may occur, emergency preparedness must ensure that adequate focus and resources remain for other clinical entities, such as HF, to ensure optimal care is delivered across all areas of illness.

Developing a fast-track discharge protocol for patients with cerebral aneurysms treated via neuroendovascular techniques

INTRODUCTION

As we emerge from the current pandemic, hospitals, staff, and resources will need to continue to adjust to meet ongoing healthcare demands. Lessons learned during past shortages can be used to optimize peri-procedural protocols to safely improve the utilization of hospital resources.

METHODS

Retrospective review of patients who underwent elective endovascular intracranial aneurysm treatment was performed. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with patients who were able to be discharged within 24 h of elective procedures. Rates of complications (particularly readmission) were determined.

RESULTS

330 patients underwent elective endovascular aneurysm treatment with 86 (26.1%) discharged within 24 h. Factors associated with earlier discharge included procedure years (2019-2021) and male sex. Patients were more likely to be discharged later (after 24 h) if they underwent stent-coil embolization or flow-diversion. There was no association between discharge timing and likelihood of readmission.

DISCUSSION

Our review highlights the safety of earlier discharge and allowed us to prepare a fast-track protocol for same-day discharge in these patients. This protocol will be studied prospectively in the next phase of this study. As we gain more comfort with emerging, minimally invasive endovascular therapies, we hope to safely achieve same-day discharge on a protocolized and routine basis, reducing the demand of elective aneurysm treatments on our healthcare system.

CONCLUSION

We retrospectively demonstrate that early discharge following elective aneurysm treatment is safe in our cohort and provide a fast-track pathway based on these findings for other centers developing similar protocols.

Patient report outcomes in cryoballoon ablation of atrial fibrillation during the COVID Era: Insights from the 1STOP project

BACKGROUND

Pulmonary vein isolation by cryoablation (PVI-C) is a standard therapy for the treatment of patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF). AF symptoms are highly subjective; however, they are important outcomes for the patient. The aim is to describe the use and impact of a web-based App to collect AF-related symptoms in a population of patients who underwent PVI-C in seven Italian centers.

METHODS

A patient App to collect AF-related symptoms and general health status was proposed to all patients who underwent an index PVI-C. Patients were divided into two groups according to the utilization of the App or the non-usage.

RESULTS

Out of 865 patients, 353 (41%) subjects composed the App group, and 512 (59%) composed the No-App group. Baseline characteristics were comparable between the two cohorts except for age, sex, type of AF, and body mass index. During a mean follow-up of 7.9±13.8 months, AF recurrence was found in 57/865 (7%) subjects with an annual rate of 7.36% (95% CI:5.67-9.55%) in the No-App versus 10.99% (95% CI:9.67-12.48%) in the App group, p=0.007. In total, 14,458 diaries were sent by the 353 subjects in the App group and 77.1% reported a good health status and no symptoms. In only 518 diaries (3.6%), the patients reported a bad health status, and bad health status was an independent parameter of AF recurrence during follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of a web App to record AF-related symptoms was feasible and effective. Additionally, a bad health status reporting in the App was associated with AF recurrence during follow-up.

Hospital Adaptions to Mitigate the COVID-19 Pandemic Effects on MARQUIS Toolkit Implementation and Sustainability

OBJECTIVE

To explore the perceived effects of COVID-19 on MARQUIS toolkit implementation and sustainability, challenges faced by hospitals in sustaining medication reconciliation efforts, and the strategies used to mitigate the negative effects of the pandemic.

DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SETTINGS

Primary qualitative data were extracted from a Web-based survey. Data were collected from hospitals that participated in MARQUIS2 ( n = 18) and the MARQUIS Collaborative ( n = 5).

STUDY DESIGN

A qualitative, cross-sectional study was conducted.

DATA COLLECTION/DATA EXTRACTION

Qualitative data were extracted from a Research Electronic Data Capture survey databased and uploaded into an Excel data analysis template. Two coders independently coded the data with a third coder resolving discrepancies.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Thirty-one team members participated, including pharmacists ( n = 20; 65%), physicians ( n = 9; 29%), or quality-improvement (QI) specialists ( n = 2; 6%) with expertise in medication reconciliation (MedRec) (14; 45%) or QI (10; 32%). Organizational resources were limited, including funding, staffing, and access to pharmacy students. To support program continuation, hospitals reallocated staff and used new MedRec order sets. Telemedicine, workflow adaptations, leadership support, QI team involvement, and ongoing audits and feedback promoted toolkit sustainability.

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 affected the capacity of hospitals to sustain the MARQUIS toolkit. However, hospitals adapted various strategies to sustain the toolkit.

Predictors of worse outcome after postponing non-emergency cardiac interventions during the COVID-19 pandemic

OBJECTIVE

Deferral of non-emergency cardiac procedures is associated with increased early emergency cardiovascular hospitalisation. This study aimed to identify predictors of worse clinical outcome after deferral of non-emergency cardiovascular interventions.

METHODS

This observational case-control study included consecutive patients whose non-emergency cardiac intervention has been postponed during COVID-19-related lockdown between 19 March and 30 April 2020 (n=193). Cox regression was performed to identify predictors of the combined 1-year end point emergency cardiovascular hospitalisation and death. All patients undergoing non-emergency interventions in the corresponding time period 2019 served as control group (n=216).

RESULTS

The combined end point of death and emergency cardiovascular hospitalisation occurred in 70 (36.3%) of 193 patients with a postponed cardiovascular intervention. The planned intervention was deferred by a median of 23 (19-36) days. Arterial hypertension (HR 2.27; 95% CI 1.00 to 5.12; p=0.049), chronic kidney disease (HR 1.89; 95% CI 1.03 to 3.49; p=0.041) as well as severe valvular heart disease (HR 3.08; 95% CI 1.68 to 5.64; p<0.001) were independent predictors of death or emergency hospitalisation. Kaplan-Maier estimators of the combined end point were 31% in patients with arterial hypertension, 56% in patients with severe valvular heart disease and 77% with both risk factors (HR 12.4, 95% CI 3.8 to 40.7; p<0.001) and only 9% in patients without these risk factors (log rank p<0.001). N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) cut-point of ≥1109 pg/mL best predicts the occurrence of primary end point event in deferred patients (area under the curve 0.71; p<0.001; sensitivity 63.8%, specificity 69.4%).

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that patients with either arterial hypertension, chronic kidney or severe valvular heart disease are at very high risk for emergency hospitalisation and increased mortality in case of postponed cardiac interventions even in supposed stable clinical status. Risk seems to be even higher in patients suffering from a combination of these conditions. If the ongoing or future pandemics force hospitals again to postpone cardiac interventions, the biomarker NT-proBNP is an applicable parameter for outpatient monitoring to identify those at risk for adverse cardiovascular events.

Reshaping care in the aftermath of the pandemic. Implications for cardiology health systems

In the last two years, the COVID-19 pandemic has undeniably changed everyday life and significantly reshaped the healthcare systems. Besides the direct effect on daily care leading to significant excess mortality, several collateral damages have been observed during the pandemic. The impact of the pandemic led to staff shortages, disrupted education, worse healthcare professional well-being, and a lack of proper clinical training and research. In this review we highlight the results of these important changes and how can the healthcare systems can adapt to prevent unprecedented events in case of future catastrophes.

Use of Cardiac Procedures in People with Diabetes during the COVID Pandemic in Spain: Effects on the In-Hospital Mortality

We aimed to assess the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic in Spain on people with diabetes undergoing cardiac procedures, such as coronary artery bypass graft (CABG), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), open surgical valve replacement (OSVR), and transcatheter valve implantation (TCVI). We compared the year 2019 with the year 2020. We conducted an observational study using data from the Spanish National Hospital Discharge Database from 1 January 2019 to 31 December 2020. In 2020, a total of 21,067 cardiac procedures were performed on people with diabetes compared with 24,675 in the previous year. The use of CABG, PCI, OSVR and TCVI decreased from 2019 to 2020 by 13.9%, 14.8%, 21.4% and 2.9%, respectively. In 2020, patients had a significantly higher mean Charlson Comorbidity Index than in 2019 for all the cardiac procedures analyzed. In-hospital mortality (IHM) was higher (p > 0.05) for all the procedures in the year 2020. Over the entire period, female sex was a significant risk factor for IHM among those who underwent CABG, PCI and OSVR (OR 1.94, 95%CI 1.41-2.66; OR 1.19, 95%CI 1.05-1.35; and OR 1.79, 95%CI 1.38-2.32, respectively). The sensitivity analysis including two more years, 2017 and 2018, confirmed that female patients and comorbidity were risk factors for IHM in patients with diabetes regardless of whether it was during the pandemic era or before. We conclude that the frequency of cardiac procedures among people with diabetes declined in 2020. IHM did not change significantly in the COVID-19 era.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Elective and Emergency Inpatient Procedure Volumes in Switzerland - A Retrospective Study Based on Insurance Claims Data

BACKGROUND

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‑CoV‑2) pandemic forced hospitals to redistribute resources for the treatment of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), yet the impact on elective and emergency inpatient procedure volumes is unclear.

METHODS

We analyzed anonymized data on 234 921 hospitalizations in 2017-2020 (55.9% elective) from a big Swiss health insurer. We used linear regression models to predict, based on pre-pandemic data, the expected weekly numbers of procedures in 2020 in the absence of a pandemic and compared these to the observed numbers in 2020. Compensation effects were investigated by discretely integrating the difference between the two numbers over time.

RESULTS

During the first COVID-19 wave in spring 2020, elective procedure numbers decreased by 52.9% (95% confidence interval -64.5% to -42.5%), with cardiovascular and orthopedic elective procedure numbers specifically decreasing by 45.5% and 72.4%. Elective procedure numbers normalized during summer with some compensation of postponed procedures, leaving a deficit of -9.9% (-15.8% to -4.5%) for the whole year 2020. Emergency procedure numbers also decreased by 17.1% (-23.7% to -9.8%) during the first wave, but over the whole year 2020, net emergency procedure volumes were similar to control years.

CONCLUSION

Inpatient procedure volumes in Switzerland decreased considerably in the beginning of the pandemic but recovered quickly after the first wave. Still, there was a net deficit in procedures at the end of the year. Health system leaders must work to ensure that adequate access to non-COVID-19 related care is maintained during future pandemic phases in order to prevent negative health consequences.

A predictive model for the post-pandemic delay in elective treatment

The COVID-19 pandemic had a major impact on healthcare systems across the world. In the United Kingdom, one of the strategies used by hospitals to cope with the surge in patients infected with SARS-Cov-2 was to cancel a vast number of elective treatments planned and limit its resources for non-critical patients. This resulted in a 30% drop in the number of people joining the waiting list in 2020-2021 versus 2019-2020. Once the pandemic subsides and resources are freed for elective treatment, the expectation is that the patients failing to receive treatment throughout the pandemic would trigger a significant backlog on the waiting list post-pandemic with major repercussions to patient health and quality of life. As the nation emerges from the worst phase of the pandemic, hospitals are focusing on strategies to prioritise patients for elective treatments. A key challenge in this context is the ability to quantify the expected backlog and predict the delays experienced by patients as an outcome of the prioritisation policies. This study presents an approach based on discrete-event simulation to predict the elective waiting list backlog along with the delay in treatment based on a predetermined prioritisation policy. The model is demonstrated using data on the endoscopy waiting list at Cambridge University Hospitals. The model shows that 21% of the patients on the waiting list will experience a delay less than 18-weeks, the acceptable threshold set by the National Health Service (NHS). A longer-term scenario analysis based on the model reveals investment in NHS resources will have a significant positive outcome for addressing the waiting lists. The model presented in this paper has the potential to be an invaluable tool for post-pandemic planning for hospitals around the world that are facing a crisis of treatment backlog.

Elective surgeries during and after the COVID-19 pandemic: Case burden and physician shortage concerns

The COVID-19 pandemic had a significant impact on several aspects of global healthcare systems, particularly surgical services. New guidelines, resource scarcity, and an ever-increasing demand for care have posed challenges to healthcare professionals, resulting in the cancellation of many surgeries, with short and long-term consequences for surgical care and patient outcomes. As the pandemic subsides and the healthcare system attempts to reestablish a sense of normalcy, surgical recommendations and advisories will shift. These changes, combined with a growing case backlog (postponed surgeries + regularly scheduled surgeries) and a physician shortage, can have serious consequences for physician health and, as a result, surgical care. Several initiatives are already being implemented by governments to ensure a smooth transition as surgeries resume. Newer and more efficient steps aimed at providing adequate surgical care while preventing physician burnout, on the other hand, necessitate a collaborative effort from governments, national medical boards, institutions, and healthcare professionals. This perspective aims to highlight alterations in surgical recommendations over the course of the pandemic and how these changes continue to influence surgical care and patient outcomes as the pandemic begins to soften its grip.

•

The COVID-19 pandemic had a significant impact on several aspects of surgical care.

•

New surgical recommendations amidst an ever-increasing demand for care pose, short and long-term consequences for surgical care and patient outcomes.

•

As the pandemic subsides, these changes, combined with a growing case backlog and a physician shortage, can have serious consequences for physician health and, as a result, surgical care.

The collateral damage of COVID-19 to cardiovascular services: a meta-analysis

AIMS

The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on care and outcomes across non-COVID-19 cardiovascular (CV) diseases is unknown. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to quantify the effect and investigate for variation by CV disease, geographic region, country income classification and the time course of the pandemic.

METHODS AND RESULTS

From January 2019 to December 2021, Medline and Embase databases were searched for observational studies comparing a pandemic and pre-pandemic period with relation to CV disease hospitalisations, diagnostic and interventional procedures, outpatient consultations, and mortality. Observational data were synthesised by incidence rate ratios (IRR) and risk ratios (RR) for binary outcomes and weighted mean differences for continuous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals. The study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021265930). A total of 158 studies, covering 49 countries and 6 continents, were used for quantitative synthesis. Most studies (80%) reported information for high-income countries (HICs). Across all CV disease and geographies there were fewer hospitalisations, diagnostic and interventional procedures, and outpatient consultations during the pandemic. By meta-regression, in low-middle income countries (LMICs) compared to HICs the decline in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) hospitalisations (RR 0.79, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.66-0.94) and revascularisation (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.62-0.87) was more severe. In LMICs, but not HICs, in-hospital mortality increased for STEMI (RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.10-1.37) and heart failure (RR 1.08, 95% CI 1.04-1.12). The magnitude of decline in hospitalisations for CV diseases did not differ between the first and second wave.

CONCLUSIONS

There was substantial global collateral CV damage during the COVID-19 pandemic with disparity in severity by country income classification.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Use and Outcomes of Cardiac Procedures in COPD Patients

(1) Background: The aim of this study was to assess the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the use and outcomes of cardiac procedures among people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in Spain. (2) Methods: We used national hospital discharge data to select patients admitted to hospital with a diagnosis of COPD from 1 January 2019 to 31 December 2020. (3) Results: The number of COPD patients hospitalized in 2019 who underwent a cardiac procedure was 4483, 16.2% higher than in 2020 (n = 3757). The length of hospital stay was significantly lower in 2020 than in 2019 (9.37 vs. 10.13 days; p = 0.004), and crude in-hospital mortality (IHM) was significantly higher (5.32% vs. 4.33%; p = 0.035). Multivariable logistic regression models to assess the differences in IHM from 2019 to 2020 showed Odds Ratio (OR) values over 1, suggesting a higher risk of dying in 2020 compared to in 2019. However, the ORs were only statistically significant for "any cardiac procedure" (1.18, 95% CI 1.03-1.47). The Charlson comorbidity index increased IHM for each of the procedures analyzed. The probability of IHM was higher for women and older patients who underwent coronary artery bypass graft or open valve replacement procedures. Suffering a COVID-19 infection was associated with significantly higher mortality after cardiac procedures. (4) Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic limited the access to healthcare for patients with COPD.

Aortic stenosis post-COVID-19: a mathematical model on waiting lists and mortality

OBJECTIVES

To provide estimates for how different treatment pathways for the management of severe aortic stenosis (AS) may affect National Health Service (NHS) England waiting list duration and associated mortality.

DESIGN

We constructed a mathematical model of the excess waiting list and found the closed-form analytic solution to that model. From published data, we calculated estimates for how the strategies listed under Interventions may affect the time to clear the backlog of patients waiting for treatment and the associated waiting list mortality.

SETTING

The NHS in England.

PARTICIPANTS

Estimated patients with AS in England.

INTERVENTIONS

(1) Increasing the capacity for the treatment of severe AS, (2) converting proportions of cases from surgery to transcatheter aortic valve implantation and (3) a combination of these two.

RESULTS

In a capacitated system, clearing the backlog by returning to pre-COVID-19 capacity is not possible. A conversion rate of 50% would clear the backlog within 666 (533-848) days with 1419 (597-2189) deaths while waiting during this time. A 20% capacity increase would require 535 (434-666) days, with an associated mortality of 1172 (466-1859). A combination of converting 40% cases and increasing capacity by 20% would clear the backlog within a year (343 (281-410) days) with 784 (292-1324) deaths while awaiting treatment.

CONCLUSION

A strategy change to the management of severe AS is required to reduce the NHS backlog and waiting list deaths during the post-COVID-19 'recovery' period. However, plausible adaptations will still incur a substantial wait to treatment and many hundreds dying while waiting.

Deferral of non-emergency cardiac procedures is associated with increased early emergency cardiovascular hospitalizations

Background

During the COVID-19 pandemic, in anticipation of a demand surge for high-care hospital beds, many hospitals postponed non-emergency interventions of cardiac patients.

Aim

The aim of this study was to assess the outcomes of cardiac patients whose non-emergency interventions had been deferred during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

Patients whose non-emergency cardiac intervention had been cancelled between March 19th and April 30th, 2020 were included (study group). All patients were considered as deferrable according to current recommendations. Patients’ outcomes after 12 months were compared to a seasonal control group who underwent non-emergency interventions in 2019 as scheduled. The primary endpoint was a composite of emergency cardiovascular hospitalization and death. Secondary endpoints were levels of symptoms and cardiac biomarkers.

Results

Outcomes of 193 consecutive patients in the study group were assessed and compared to 216 controls. The primary endpoint occurred significantly more often in the study group (HR 2.42, 95%CI 1.63–3.61, p < 0.001). This was driven by an increase in hospitalizations. Subgroup analyses showed that especially patients with a deferred transcatheter heart valve intervention experienced early emergency hospitalization (HR 9.55, 95%CI 3.70–24.62, p < 0.001). These findings were accompanied by more pronounced symptoms and higher biomarker levels.

Conclusions

Deferral of non-emergency cardiac interventions to meet the higher demand for hospital beds during the COVID-19 crisis is associated with early emergency cardiovascular hospitalizations. Patients suffering from valvular heart disease especially constitute a vulnerable group. Consequently, our results suggest that current recommendations on the management of cardiovascular disease during the COVID-19 pandemic need revision.

Graphical abstract

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00392-022-02032-z.

Spanish Cardiac Catheterization and Coronary Intervention Registry. 30th Official Report of the Interventional Cardiology Association of the Spanish Society of Cardiology (1990-2020) in the year of the COVID-19 pandemic

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

The Interventional Cardiology Association of the Spanish Society of Cardiology (ACI-SEC) presents its annual activity report for 2020, the year of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic.

METHODS

All Spanish centers with catheterization laboratories were invited to participate. Data were collected online and were analyzed by an external company, together with the members of the ACI-SEC.

RESULTS

A total of 123 centers participated (4 more than 2019), of which 83 were public and 40 were private. Diagnostic coronary angiograms decreased by 9.4%, percutaneous coronary interventions by 10.1%, primary percutaneous coronary interventions by 4.1%, transcatheter aortic valve replacements by 0.9%, and left atrial appendage closure by 8.3%. The only procedures that increased with respect to previous years were edge-to-edge mitral valve repair (13.8%) and patent foramen ovale closure (19.4%). The use of pressure wire (5.5%), intravascular imaging devices and plaque preparation devices decreased (with the exception of lithotripsy, which increased by 62%).

CONCLUSIONS

In the year of the COVID-19 pandemic, the registry showed a marked drop in activity in all procedures except for percutaneous mitral valve repair and patent foramen ovale closure. This decrease was less marked than previously described, suggesting a rebound in interventional activity after the first wave.

Unmanaged Pharmacogenomic and Drug Interaction Risk Associations with Hospital Length of Stay among Medicare Advantage Members with COVID-19: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Unmanaged pharmacogenomic and drug interaction risk can lengthen hospitalization and may have influenced the severe health outcomes seen in some COVID-19 patients. To determine if unmanaged pharmacogenomic and drug interaction risks were associated with longer lengths of stay (LOS) among patients hospitalized with COVID-19, we retrospectively reviewed medical and pharmacy claims from 6025 Medicare Advantage members hospitalized with COVID-19. Patients with a moderate or high pharmacogenetic interaction probability (PIP), which indicates the likelihood that testing would identify one or more clinically actionable gene–drug or gene–drug–drug interactions, were hospitalized for 9% (CI: 4–15%; p < 0.001) and 16% longer (CI: 8–24%; p < 0.001), respectively, compared to those with low PIP. Risk adjustment factor (RAF) score, a commonly used measure of disease burden, was not associated with LOS. High PIP was significantly associated with 12–22% longer LOS compared to low PIP in patients with hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). A greater drug–drug interaction risk was associated with 10% longer LOS among patients with two or three chronic conditions. Thus, unmanaged pharmacogenomic risk was associated with longer LOS in these patients and managing this risk has the potential to reduce LOS in severely ill patients, especially those with chronic conditions.

Collateral damage of COVID-19 pandemic: The impact on a gynecologic surgery department

Objective

This study focuses on changes in gynecologic surgical activity at Hospital Foch, Paris, France during the first French COVID lockdown in 2020. Additional goals include the evaluation the extent of the postponement suffered for each type of surgery and estimate the possible negative impact for patients.

Study design

Single-center, retrospective, chart-review cohort study in the gynecology department of Hospital Foch. Comparison of all patients scheduled, postponed and operated during the first COVID lockdown (March 14, to May 11, 2020) versus the same period in 2019. Postponed surgeries were classified into 4 scheduling interval categories according to the Society of Gynecology Oncology (SGO) recommendations: urgent (without delay), semi-urgent (1–4 weeks), non-urgent (>4–12 weeks) and elective (>3 months) and evaluated to determine whether COVID-19-related delays of surgeries fell within guidelines. The potential “loss of chance” or medical risk associated with postponed surgeries was estimated according to a composite criterion including death, aggravation of expected tumor stages/grades in cancers, increase in surgical complexity compared to that initially planned, need for preoperative transfusions, start of morphine consumption during preoperative treatment for opiate-naive patients, additional hospitalization or consultations in emergency room and delay in treatment when surgery was urgent.

Results

During the 2020 French COVID lockdown, 61 patients had a surgical procedure and 114 were postponed; in the comparator 2019 group, 232 patients underwent surgical procedures, indicating an overall decrease of 65% of activity. Analysis of differences between the two years revealed a reduction of 64% in emergency procedures, 90% of functional pathologies, and 13% of cancers. According to SGO guidelines, the only type of surgical procedures that had excessive delay was the semi-urgent group, where time to surgery was 6.7 weeks [range 5.4–10 weeks] instead of the recommended interval of 1–4 weeks. Among postponed surgeries there were 10 patients (8.7%) with a potential “loss of chance” according to the composite criteria, all included in the semi-urgent group.

Conclusion

The COVID 19 pandemic was responsible for a significant decrease of activity in the surgical department of Hospital Foch. Difficulty of rescheduling surgeries was responsible for an increased delay in semi-urgent operations. In almost 9% of postponed surgeries, there was a potential “loss of chance”, which likely represents only the tip of iceberg of collateral damages due to COVID 19 pandemic in this surgical unit. These data show the importance of continuing to treat pathologies requiring urgent or semi-urgent surgery during pandemics.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation for degenerated aortic valves: Experience with a new supra-annular device. The Spanish Allegra valve-in-valve (SAVIV) registry

OBJECTIVES

The objective was to evaluate the results of valve-in-valve procedures performed with the Allegra device.

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation to treat degenerated biological aortic valves (valve-in-valve) is an established procedure in most catheterization laboratories, but the results are poorer than procedures done in native aortic stenosis. The Allegra device (Biosensors, Morges, Switzerland) has an excellent design to treat these patients.

METHODS

All patients with severely degenerated biological aortic valve treated with the Allegra device in centers from Spain until December 2020 were included (n = 29). Hemodynamic results and 30-day clinical outcomes were evaluated. The predominant hemodynamic failure was stenosis in 15, regurgitation in 11, and a combination of both in 3 cases. Time from aortic valve replacement to valve-in-valve procedure was 8.4 ± 3.9 years (range 3.3-22.1).

RESULTS

After the procedure, maximum and mean trans-valvular gradients were 17.4 ± 12.3 and 8.4 ± 6.1 mmHg, respectively. Device success was obtained in 28 patients (96.6%). In one patient with a degenerated 19 mm prosthetic valve, mean gradient after the procedure was 22 mmHg. No patients had a para-valvular leak grade >1. There were no deaths during the hospitalization or at 30 days and one patient suffered a stroke.

CONCLUSIONS

The Allegra trans-catheter aortic valve offers optimal hemodynamic results in patients with severely degenerated biological aortic valve.

Covid and Cardiovascular Diseases: Direct and Indirect Damages and Future Perspective

SARS-CoV-2 infection determines a disease that predominantly affects lungs. However the cytokines storms, determined by the huge immune response to the infection, could affect also other organs and apparatus such as heart and vessels. Beyond the acute inflammation itself also hypercoagulative status has been linked to SARSCoV-2 infection and this surely relates to the increase seen in prevalence of pulmonary embolism and myocardial infarction. A number of cardiac abnormalities and pathologies have been observed, with special attention to cardiac arrhythmias and myocardial involvement. Furthermore, indirect damages determined by the reduction in acute and chronic cardiovascular care, results in a strong mortality and morbidity outcomes in cardiological patients. In this review we will summarise current knowledge on both direct and indirect cardiovascular damages determined by the SARS-CoV-2 pandemia.

Managing a Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology in Times of COVID-19 Outbreak: The Foch Hospital Experience

Departments of Gynecology and Obstetrics, as other departments, were faced with a major challenge at the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. Fast restructuring was necessary in order to provide the means for COVID-related care. In this article we share our 1-year experience in reshaping our activities, managing healthcare workers and securing a pathway for pregnant patients, including potential, and confirmed COVID-19 cases. Priorities were set on ensuring patients' and healthcare workers' safety. Key containment measures included facemasks, systematic screening, dedicated spaces for COVID-19 cases with reinforced measures and vaccination campaign.

Postponing cardiac procedures during the pandemic: The balance between elective and selective!

What the article teaches:Postponing elective cardiac procedures may have an adverse impact on short‐term outcomes.

How it will impact practice:Elective patients scheduled for cardiac procedures have different risk profiles and the decision for postponing should take into consideration the chances of complications related to the deferral.

What new research would help answer the question:Better validate tools to identify which subsets are more prone to early complications in case a scheduled invasive procedure is suspended.

Impact of diabetes in patients waiting for invasive cardiac procedures during COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

During COVID-19 pandemic, elective invasive cardiac procedures (ICP) have been frequently cancelled or postponed. Consequences may be more evident in patients with diabetes.

OBJECTIVES

The objective was to identify the peculiarities of patients with DM among those in whom ICP were cancelled or postponed due to the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as to identify subgroups in which the influence of DM has higher impact on the clinical outcome.

METHODS

We included 2,158 patients in whom an elective ICP was cancelled or postponed during COVID-19 pandemic in 37 hospitals in Spain. Among them, 700 (32.4%) were diabetics. Patients with and without diabetes were compared.

RESULTS

Patients with diabetes were older and had a higher prevalence of other cardiovascular risk factors, previous cardiovascular history and co-morbidities. Diabetics had a higher mortality (3.0% vs. 1.0%; p = 0.001) and cardiovascular mortality (1.9% vs. 0.4%; p = 0.001). Differences were especially important in patients with valvular heart disease (mortality 6.9% vs 1.7% [p < 0.001] and cardiovascular mortality 4.9% vs 0.9% [p = 0.002] in patients with and without diabetes, respectively). In the multivariable analysis, diabetes remained as an independent risk factor both for overall and cardiovascular mortality. No significant interaction was found with other clinical variables.

CONCLUSION

Among patients in whom an elective invasive cardiac procedure is cancelled or postponed during COVID-19 pandemic, mortality and cardiovascular mortality is higher in patients with diabetes, irrespectively on other clinical conditions. These procedures should not be cancelled in patients with diabetes.