The collateral cardiovascular damage of COVID-19: only history will reveal the depth of the iceberg

A nationwide, population-based study on specialized care for acute heart failure throughout the COVID-19 pandemic

AIMS

The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the delivery of care for patients with heart failure (HF), leading to fewer HF hospitalizations and increased mortality. However, nationwide data on quality of care and long-term outcomes across the pandemic are scarce.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We used data from the National Heart Failure Audit (NHFA) linked to national records for hospitalization and deaths. We compared pre-COVID (2018-2019), COVID (2020), and late/post-COVID (2021-2022) periods. Data for 227 250 patients admitted to hospital with HF were analysed and grouped according to the admission year and the presence of HF with (HFrEF) or without reduced ejection fraction (non-HFrEF). The median age at admission was 81 years (interquartile range 72-88), 55% were men (n = 125 975), 87% were of white ethnicity (n = 102 805), and 51% had HFrEF (n = 116 990). In-hospital management and specialized cardiology care were maintained throughout the pandemic with an increasing percentage of patients discharged on disease-modifying medications over time (p < 0.001). Long-term outcomes improved over time (hazard ratio [HR] 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.90-0.95, p < 0.001), mainly driven by a reduction in cardiovascular death. Receiving specialized cardiology care was associated with better long-term outcomes both for those who had HFrEF (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.77-0.82, p < 0.001) and for those who had non-HFrEF (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.85-0.90, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the disruption of healthcare systems, the clinical characteristics of patients admitted with HF were similar and the overall standard of care was maintained throughout the pandemic. Long-term survival of patients hospitalized with HF continued to improve after COVID-19, especially for HFrEF.

Effect of COVID-19 Pandemic Lockdown on Emergency Medical Service Utilisation, and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Volume-An Australian Perspective

BACKGROUND

Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) admissions and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) volume declined during periods of COVID-19 lockdown internationally in 2020. The effect of lockdown on emergency medical service (EMS) utilisation, and PCI volume during the initial phase of the pandemic in Australia has not been well described.

METHOD

We analysed data from the Victorian Cardiac Outcomes Registry (VCOR), a state-wide PCI registry, linked with the Ambulance Victoria EMS registry. PCI volume, 30-day major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE; composite of mortality, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, unplanned revascularisation, and stroke), and EMS utilisation were compared over four time periods: lockdown (26 Mar 2020-12 May 2020); pre-lockdown (26 Feb 2020-25 Mar 2020); post-lockdown (13 May 2020-10 Jul 2020); and the year prior (26 Mar 2019-12 May 2019). Interrupted time series analysis was performed to assess PCI trends within and between consecutive periods.

RESULTS

The EMS utilisation for ACS during lockdown was higher compared with other periods: lockdown 39.4% vs pre-lockdown 29.7%; vs post-lockdown 33.6%; vs year prior 27.1%; all p<0.01. Median daily PCI cases were similar: 31 (IQR 10, 38) during lockdown; 39 (15, 49) pre-lockdown; 39.5 (11, 44) post-lockdown; and, 42 (10, 49) the year prior; all p>0.05. Median door-to-procedure time for ACS indication during lockdown was shorter at 3 hours (1.2, 20.6) vs pre-lockdown 3.9 (1.7, 21); vs post-lockdown 3.5 (1.5, 21.26); and, the year prior 3.5 (1.5, 23.7); all p<0.05. Lockdown period was associated with lower odds for 30-day MACCE compared to pre-lockdown (odds ratio [OR] 0.55 [0.33-0.93]; p=0.026); post-lockdown (OR 0.66; [0.40-1.06]; p=0.087); and the year prior (OR 0.55 [0.33-0.93]; p=0.026).

CONCLUSIONS

Contrary to international trends, EMS utilisation for ACS increased during lockdown but PCI volumes remained similar throughout the initial stages of the pandemic in Victoria, with no observed adverse effect on 30-day MACCE during lockdown. These data suggest that the public health response in Victoria was not associated with poorer quality cardiovascular care in patients receiving PCI.

The Evaluation of Lipid-Lowering Treatment in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome in a Hungarian Invasive Centre in 2015, 2017, and during the COVID-19 Pandemic-The Comparison of the Achieved LDL-Cholesterol Values Calculated with Friedewald and Martin-Hopkins Methods

Background/Objectives: Patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) represent a vulnerable population. We aimed to investigate serum lipid levels of patients with ACS upon admission and during one year of the COVID-19 pandemic in a rural county hospital, and compared these findings with the data of patients with ACS in 2015 and 2017. The secondary aim of this paper was the comparison of the LDL-C values calculated with the Friedewald and Martin-Hopkins methods. Methods: A retrospective analysis of lipid-lowering data of patients treated with ACS in 2015, 2017 and in a COVID-19 year (1 April 2020-31 March 2021) was performed; the patient's numbers were 454, 513 and 531, respectively. Results: In the COVID-19 period one year after the index event, only 42% of the patients had lipid values available, while these ratios were 54% and 73% in 2017 and in 2015, respectively. Using the Friedewald formula, in the COVID-19 era the median of LDL cholesterol (LDL-F) was 1.64 (1.09-2.30) mmol/L at six months and 1.60 (1.19-2.27) mmol/L at one year, respectively. These values were 1.92 (1.33-2.27) mmol/L and 1.73 (1.36-2.43) mmol/L using the Martin-Hopkins method (LDL-MH). The LDL-F yielded significantly lower values (15% lower at six months, p = 0.044; and 8% lower at one year, p = 0.014). The LDL-F reached the previous target of 1.8 mmol/L during the COVID-19 pandemic 36% at one year vs. 48% in 2017, and 37% in 2015. The recent target LDL-C level of 1.4 mmol/L was achieved in 22% of cases in the COVID-19 pandemic, 16% in 2015 and 19% in 2017. Conclusions: A significantly lower proportion of patients with ACS had available lipid tests during the COVID-19 pandemic. Besides the lower number of available samples, the proportion of achieved 1.4 mmol/L LDL-C target lipids was stable. More rigorous outpatient care in the follow-up period may help to improve the quality of lipid lowering treatments and subsequent secondary cardiovascular prevention. If direct LDL-C determination is not available, we prefer the LDL calculation with the Martin-Hopkins method.

Impacts of COVID-19 pandemic through decomposition of life expectancy according to leading causes and place of death in Czechia

While the direct effects of the pandemic are well documented, less is known about the indirect ones, including changes in healthcare provision or human behavior. This paper aims to study the impact of indirect consequences on mortality, focusing on two leading causes (cardiovascular diseases, COVID-19) and places of death in Czechia, during the COVID-19 pandemic, one of the most severely affected European countries. The analysis was performed using data from the Czech Statistical Office and the Institute of Health Information and Statistics. The study compares annual mortality changes during three time periods: pre-pandemic (2018-2019), pandemic beginning and peaking (2020-2021), and pandemic fading (2022). Pandemic years were covered by the WHO public health emergency of international concern. Abridged life tables were computed, and Pollard's decomposition was used to calculate the contributions of causes and places of death on annual differences in life expectancy. Seasonal decomposition of monthly time series revealed an increase in cardiovascular mortality at home or in social care facilities corresponding to limitations in healthcare. While COVID-19 had a systemic negative effect on life expectancy during the pandemic, the impact of cardiovascular mortality according to place of death changed over time. This study contributes to the evidence base of systemic risks during health crises and emergency response.

Interaction of COVID-19 With Common Cardiovascular Disorders

The onset and widespread dissemination of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 in late 2019 impacted the world in a way not seen since the 1918 H1N1 pandemic, colloquially known as the Spanish Flu. Much like the Spanish Flu, which was observed to disproportionately impact young adults, it became clear in the early days of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic that certain groups appeared to be at higher risk for severe illness once infected. One such group that immediately came to the forefront and garnered international attention was patients with preexisting cardiovascular disease. Here, we examine the available literature describing the interaction of COVID-19 with a myriad of cardiovascular conditions and diseases, paying particular attention to patients diagnosed with arrythmias, heart failure, and coronary artery disease. We further discuss the association of acute COVID-19 with de novo cardiovascular disease, including myocardial infarction due to coronary thrombosis, myocarditis, and new onset arrhythmias. We will evaluate various biochemical theories to explain these findings, including possible mechanisms of direct myocardial injury caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 virus at the cellular level. Finally, we will discuss the strategies employed by numerous groups and governing bodies within the cardiovascular disease community to address the unprecedented challenges posed to the care of our most vulnerable patients, including heart transplant recipients, end-stage heart failure patients, and patients suffering from acute coronary syndromes, during the early days and height of the COVID-19 pandemic.

A Review of Heart Failure in patients with COVID-19

The interplay of COVID-19 and heart failure is complex and involves direct and indirect effects. Patients with existing heart failure develop more severe COVID-19 symptoms and have worse clinical outcomes. Pandemic-related policies and protocols have negatively affected care for cardiovascular conditions and established hospital protocols, which is particularly important for patients with heart failure.

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.

Cardiovascular Damage in COVID-19: What We Know Two Years Later

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW

The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has profoundly influenced cardiological clinical and basic research in the past two years. In the present review, we summarize the current knowledge on myocardial involvement in COVID-19, providing an overview on the incidence, the pathogenetic mechanisms, and the clinical implications of cardiac injury in this setting.

RECENT FINDINGS

The possibility of heart involvement in patients with COVID-19 has received great attention since the beginning of the pandemic. After more than two years, several steps have been taken in understanding the mechanisms and the incidence of cardiac injury during COVID-19 infection. Similarly, studies globally have clarified the implications of co-existing heart disease and COVID-19. Severe COVID-19 infection may be complicated by myocardial injury. To date, a direct damage from the virus has not been demonstrated. The presence of myocardial injury should be systematically assessed for a prognostication purpose and for possible therapeutic implications.

Collateral effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on cardiology service provision and cardiovascular mortality in a population-based study: COVID-COR-LT

Background

Collateral damage of the COVID-19 pandemic on cardiovascular health is increasingly studied. This is a population-based study addressing multiple aspects of cardiovascular care during the pandemic in a country of Lithuania, in which pandemic waves were significantly different.

Methods

Data on cardiology outpatient care, hospitalizations and cardiovascular mortality in 2019 and 2020 were collected from Lithuanian nationwide administrative databases and registries. Weekly data and aggregated numbers of corresponding 6-week phases were analyzed comparing the numbers between 2019 and 2020. Age, sex and regional subgroup analysis was performed.

Results

Both cardiovascular outpatient care visits and hospitalizations decreased dramatically in 2020 compared to 2019 with a peak reduction (up to − 60% for both) during the first pandemic wave in spring of 2020. Simultaneously, cardiovascular mortality was much higher in 2020, with a pronounced peak at the end of the year compared to 2019 (up to 46%). The increase was even more staggering when analyzing home deaths, which rose up to 91% by the end of 2020. Notable differences between age groups, regions and sexes were documented.

Conclusion

A profound indirect damage of COVID-19 pandemic on cardiovascular care was observed in this study, with striking decreases in cardiovascular care provision and concurrent increase in cardiovascular mortality, both overall and, even more dramatically, at home.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05021575 (registration date 25–08–2021, retrospectively registered).

Graphical abstract

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00392-022-02033-y.

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Hospital Services for Patients with Cardiac Diseases: A Scoping Review

This study aims to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on hospital cardiac care, as assessed by performance indicators. Scoping review methodology: performance indicators were extracted to inform on changes in care during January–June 2020. Database searches yielded 6277 articles, of which 838 met the inclusion criteria. After full-text screening, 94 articles were included and 1637 indicators were retrieved. Most of the indicators that provided information on changes in the number of admissions (n = 118, 88%) signaled a decrease in admissions; 88% (n = 15) of the indicators showed patients’ delayed presentation and 40% (n = 54) showed patients in a worse clinical condition. A reduction in diagnostic and treatment procedures was signaled by 95% (n = 18) and 81% (n = 64) of the indicators, respectively. Length of stay decreased in 58% (n = 21) of the indicators, acute coronary syndromes treatment times increased in 61% (n = 65) of the indicators, and outpatient activity decreased in 94% (n = 17) of the indicators related to outpatient care. Telehealth utilization increased in 100% (n = 6). Outcomes worsened in 40% (n = 35) of the indicators, and mortality rates increased in 52% (n = 31). All phases of the pathway were affected. This information could support the planning of care during the ongoing pandemic and in future events.

Patients hospitalised with heart failure across different waves of the COVID-19 pandemic show consistent clinical characteristics and outcomes

BACKGROUND

During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, admissions for cardiovascular disease, including Heart Failure (HF), were reduced. Patients hospitalised for HF were sicker and with increased in-hospital mortality. So far, whether following waves had a different impact on HF patients is unknown.

METHODS

All consecutive patients hospitalised for acute heart failure during three different COVID-19 related national lockdowns were analysed. The lockdown periods were defined according to Government guidelines as 23/3/2020 to 4/7/2020 (First Lockdown), 4/11/2020 to 2/12/2020 (Second Lockdown) and 5/1/2021 to 28/2/2021 (Third Lockdown).

RESULTS

Overall, 184 patients hospitalised for HF were included in the study, 95 during the 1st lockdown, 30 during the 2nd lockdown and 59 during the 3rd lockdown. Across the three groups had comparable clinical characteristics, comorbidities and cardiovascular risk factors. Specialist in-hospital care was uninterrupted during the pandemic showing comparable mortality rates (p = 0.10). Although medical therapy for HF was comparable between the three lockdowns, a significantly higher proportion of patients received Angiotensin Receptor-Neprilysin Inhibitors (ARNI) in the second and third lockdowns (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Although public health approaches changed throughout the pandemic, the clinical characteristics and outcomes of HF patients were consistent across different waves. For patients hospitalised in the subsequent waves, a more rapid optimization of medical therapy was observed during hospitalization. Particular attention should be devoted to prevent collateral cardiovascular damage during public health emergencies.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic restrictions on ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a cardiac magnetic resonance imaging study

AIMS

The severity of myocardial tissue damage following ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) strongly determines short- and long-term prognosis. This study explored the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and associated public health restrictions on infarct severity.

METHODS AND RESULTS

STEMI patients treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and included in the prospective Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Acute ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (MARINA-STEMI) cohort study from 2015- 2020 (n = 474) were categorized according to (i) timeframes with and without major public health restrictions in 2020, and (ii) timeframes of major public health restrictions during 2020 and during the corresponding timeframes between 2015-2019. Myocardial damage was evaluated by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. During major public health restrictions in 2020 (n = 48), there was an increase in infarct size (22 [IQR 12-29] vs. 14 [IQR 6-23]%, P < 0.01), a higher frequency (77% vs. 52%, P < 0.01) and larger extent of microvascular obstruction (1.5 [IQR 0.1-11.4] vs. 0.2 [IQR 0.0-2.6]%, P < 0.01) and a higher rate of intramyocardial haemorrhage (56% vs. 34%, P = 0.02) as compared to the phases without major restrictions in 2020 (n = 101). These findings were confirmed in adjusted analysis and were consistent when comparing patients admitted in 2020 versus patients admitted in the "pre-pandemic" era (2015-2019). Patient characteristics were comparable between groups, except for a significantly longer total ischemia time (P < 0.01) and higher frequency of pre-PCI Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) flow 0 during times of major restrictions (P = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

This study provides novel mechanistic insights demonstrating a significant increase in myocardial damage in STEMI patients admitted during the COVID-19 pandemic with a temporal relation to major public health restrictions.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on in-hospital mortality in cardiovascular disease: a meta-analysis

Aims 

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in excess mortality due to both COVID-19 directly and other conditions, including cardiovascular (CV) disease. We aimed to explore the excess in-hospital mortality, unrelated to COVID-19 infection, across a range of CV diseases.

Methods and results 

A systematic search was performed for studies investigating in-hospital mortality among patients admitted with CV disease without SARS-CoV-2 infection compared with a period outside the COVID-19 pandemic. Fifteen studies on 27 421 patients with CV disease were included in the analysis. The average in-hospital mortality rate was 10.4% (n = 974) in the COVID-19 group and 5.7% (n = 1026) in the comparator group. Compared with periods outside the COVID-19 pandemic, the pooled risk ratio (RR) demonstrated increased in-hospital mortality by 62% during COVID-19 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.20–2.20, P = 0.002]. Studies with a decline in admission rate >50% during the COVID-19 pandemic observed the greatest increase in mortality compared with those with <50% reduction [RR 2.74 (95% CI 2.43–3.10) vs. 1.21 (95% CI 1.07–1.37), P < 0.001]. The observed increased mortality was consistent across different CV conditions (P = 0.74 for interaction).

Conclusions 

In-hospital mortality among patients admitted with CV diseases was increased relative to periods outside the pandemic, independent of co-infection with COVID-19. This effect was larger in studies with the biggest decline in admission rates, suggesting a sicker cohort of patients in this period. However, studies were generally poorly conducted, and there is a need for further well-designed studies to establish the full extent of mortality not directly related to COVID-19 infection.

Economic Impact of COVID-19 Lockdown on Italian NHS: Focus on Diabetes Mellitus

Background

In Italy, the adoption of a total lockdown has generated almost total suspension of outpatient visits except for emergencies. Even after lockdown, the pandemic fear created additional barriers to access the health services. The aim of our study is to evaluate the economic impact of the lockdown for COVID-19 on public health in Italy, focusing on its effects on diabetic population.

Materials and Methods

We analyzed the impact of the lockdown on excess mortality and morbidity in the Italian diabetic population during 2020. The analysis was divided into several steps: a quantification of specialist visit reduction, the calculation of excess mortality in the diabetic population, the economic evaluation of the slowdown in the use of innovative diabetic therapies. Furthermore, the impact of the lockdown on the reduction of procedures and follow-up visits in diabetic population was evaluated. The overall impact of the pandemic and lockdown effects on costs and quality of life was then calculated.

Results

During 2020, a drop of 28% in patient access has been observed. Diabetic patients recorded a twice higher mortality value compared to general population (20.4% vs 10.2%). The analysis of market data revealed a slowdown in consumption of new antidiabetic therapies (−14%, 27% vs 41%). We estimated an expense of €26.6 million for NHS and a loss of 257 utilities in diabetic population due to the missed benefits related to slowdown in innovative antidiabetic drugs use and non-optimal follow-up and control of diabetes complications. In simulation scenarios, we also estimated an overall expenditure ranging from €38.7 to 94.0 million and a loss of 294–836 utilities.

Conclusion

Diabetic population paid a high tribute to pandemic and lockdown, both in terms of number of deaths and burden of diabetic complications, together with an overall deterioration of quality of life.