Racial differences in management and outcomes of acute myocardial infarction during COVID-19 pandemic

Sex differences in acute stroke metrics and outcome dependent on COVID status

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Biological sex is known to have an impact on quality metrics of acute stroke. We aimed to determine whether COVID positivity accentuates this effect and constitutes worse outcome.

METHODS

The present analysis was based on the Global COVID-19 Stroke Registry, a retrospective, international, cohort study of consecutive ischemic stroke patients receiving intravenous thrombolysis and/or endovascular thrombectomy between 1 March 2020 and 30 June 2021. We investigated differences between the sexes in patient characteristics, acute stroke metrics as well as post-stroke outcome in COVID-positive and COVID-negative stroke patients undergoing acute revascularization procedures.

RESULTS

A total of 15,128 patients from 106 centers were recorded in the Global COVID-19 Stroke Registry, 853 (5.6%) of whom were COVID-positive. Overall, COVID-positive individuals were treated significantly slower according to every acute stroke metric compared to COVID-negative patients. We were able to show that key quality indicators in acute stroke treatment were unfavorable for COVID-negative women compared to men (last-seen-well-to-door time + 11 min in women). Furthermore, COVID-negative women had worse 3-month outcomes (3-month modified Rankin Scale score [interquartile range] 3.0 [4.0] vs. 2.0 [3.0]; p < 0.01), even after adjusting for confounders. In COVID-positive individuals no such difference between the sexes, either in acute management metrics or in 3-month outcome, was seen.

CONCLUSION

Known sex-related differences in acute stroke management exist and extend to times of crisis. Nevertheless, if patients were COVID-19-positive at stroke onset, women and men were treated the same, which could be attributed to structured treatment pathways.

Multifaceted Impact of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic on ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI): A Literature Review of Incidence, Treatment Modalities, and Outcomes

The global repercussions of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) include substantial worldwide mortality and have brought to light existing gaps in healthcare systems. Particularly, diseases requiring time-sensitive treatment, such as ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), have faced significant challenges due to the impact and revelations of the COVID-19 pandemic on healthcare infrastructure. This review addresses the impact of the pandemic on STEMI, exploring incidence, treatment modalities, and clinical outcomes. Through a critical examination of existing literature, the intricate relationship between the pandemic and cardiovascular health, specifically STEMI, is elucidated. The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on the management of STEMI, with changes in hospitalization rates, treatment strategies, and the presentation of the disease posing significant challenges. The contradictory results of COVID-19 and post-vaccine myocardial infarction, as well as gender differences in reported cases, highlight the need for further research to clarify these relationships.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Long-Term Prognosis of Acute Myocardial Infarction in Japan

Background During the early phase of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, a global reduction in hospitalizations for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) was observed. Generally, patients experienced increased severity of AMI with delays in time from symptom onset to treatment during the pandemic. However, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on in-hospital mortality among patients with AMI remains unclear. This study aimed to compare the long-term prognosis of patients with AMI during the COVID-19 pandemic to that observed in the pre-pandemic period and to evaluate the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on the prognosis of patients with AMI. Methods We reviewed the data of patients admitted to our hospital for AMI treatment between April 1, 2018, and March 31, 2021. The time from admission to major adverse cardiac events (MACE), as well as the time from admission to all-cause death, were examined between the pandemic period (April 1, 2020, to March 31, 2021) and the pre-pandemic period (April 1, 2018, to March 31, 2020). Results Eighty patients were included in the study, and those admitted during the pandemic exhibited a higher likelihood of advanced age, lower levels of LDL-cholesterol, and a reduced prevalence of hypertension. The 2.5-year MACE-free survival and overall survival rates between the patients during the pre-pandemic and pandemic periods were not significantly different. Conclusion The long-term prognosis of patients with AMI during the COVID-19 pandemic remains unclear. In this study, we reported that the 2.5-year MACE-free survival and overall survival rates of the patients with AMI admitted during the COVID-19 pandemic were not significantly different from those during the pre-pandemic period. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the prognosis of patients with AMI appears to vary according to the study population.

Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction and COVID-19, when the Sick Get Sicker: Unmasking Racial and Ethnic Inequities During a Pandemic

Minoritized racial and ethnic groups have the highest incidence, prevalence, and hospitalization rate for heart failure. Despite improvement in medical therapies and overall survival, the morbidity and mortality of these groups remain elevated. The reasons for this disparity are multifactorial, including social determinant of health (SDOH) such as access to care, bias, and structural racism. These same factors contributed to higher rates of COVID-19 infection among minoritized racial and ethnic groups. In this review, we aim to explore the lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic and its interconnection between heart failure and SDOH. The pandemic presents a window of opportunity for achieving greater equity in the health care of all vulnerable populations.

Racial Disparities in Mortality Associated With Acute Myocardial Infarction and COVID-19 in the United States: A Nationwide Analysis

This study assessed the COVID-19 pandemic's impact on racial disparities in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) management and outcomes. We reviewed AMI patient management and outcomes in the pandemic's initial nine months, comparing COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 cases using 2020's National Inpatient Sample data. Our findings revealed that patients with concurrent AMI and COVID-19 had higher in-hospital mortality (aOR 3.19, 95% CI 2.63-3.88), increased mechanical ventilation (aOR 1.90, 95% CI 1.54-2.33), and higher initiation of hemodialysis (aOR 1.38, 95% CI 1.05-1.89) compared to those without COVID-19. Moreover, Black and Asian/Pacific Islander patients had higher in-hospital mortality than White patients, (aOR 2.13, 95% CI 1.35-3.59; aOR 3.41, 95% CI 1.5-8.37). Also, Black, Hispanic, and Asian/Pacific Islander patients showed higher odds of initiating hemodialysis (aOR 5.48, 95% CI 2.13-14.1; aOR 2.99, 95% CI 1.13-7.97; aOR 7.84, 95% CI 1.55-39.5), and were less likely to receive PCI for AMI (aOR 0.71, 95% CI 0.67-0.74; aOR 0.81, 95% CI 0.77-0.86; aOR 0.82, 95% CI 0.75-0.90). Black patients also showed less likelihood of undergoing CABG (aOR 0.55, 95% CI 0.49-0.61). Our study highlights elevated mortality and complications in COVID-19 AMI patients, emphasizing significant racial disparities. These findings underscore the pressing need for initiatives addressing healthcare disparities, enhancing access, and promoting culturally sensitive care to boost health equity.

Impact of Gender, Race, and Insurance Status on Inhospital Management and Outcomes in Patients With COVID-19 and ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (a Nationwide Analysis)

There is a paucity of data exploring the impact of gender, race, and insurance status on invasive management and inhospital mortality in patients with COVID-19 with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in the United States. The National Inpatient Sample database for the year 2020 was queried to identify all adult hospitalizations with STEMI and concurrent COVID-19. A total of 5,990 patients with COVID-19 with STEMI were identified. Women had 31% lower odds of invasive management and 32% lower odds of coronary revascularization than men. Black patients had lower odds of invasive management (odds ratio [OR] 0.61, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.43 to 0.85, p = 0.004) than White patients. Black and Asian patients had lower odds of percutaneous coronary intervention (Black: OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.80, p = 0.002; Asian: OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.85, p = 0.018) than White patients. Uninsured patients had higher odds of getting percutaneous coronary intervention (OR 1.78, 95% CI 1.05 to 2.98, p = 0.031) and lower odds of inhospital mortality (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.89, p = 0.023) than privately insured patients. Patients with out-of-hospital STEMI had 19 times higher odds of invasive management and 80% lower odds of inhospital mortality than inhospital STEMI. In conclusion, we note important gender and racial disparities in invasive management of patients with COVID-19 with STEMI. Surprisingly, uninsured patients had higher revascularization rates and lower mortality than privately insured patients.

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.

Cardiovascular Health Care Implications of the COVID-19 pandemic

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has challenged the capacity of health care systems around the world, including substantial disruptions to cardiovascular care across key areas of health care delivery. In this narrative review, we examine the implications of the COVID-19 pandemic for cardiovascular health care, including excess cardiovascular mortality, acute and elective cardiovascular care, and disease prevention. Additionally, we consider the long-term public health consequences of disruptions to cardiovascular care across both primary and secondary care settings. Finally, we review health care inequalities and their driving factors, as highlighted by the pandemic, and consider their importance in the context of cardiovascular health care.

A Review of ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction in Patients with COVID-19

The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to a significant increase in worldwide morbidity and mortality. Patients with COVID-19 are at risk for developing a variety of cardiovascular conditions including acute coronary syndromes, stress-induced cardiomyopathy, and myocarditis. Patients with COVID-19 who develop ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) are at a higher risk of morbidity and mortality when compared with their age- and sex-matched STEMI patients without COVID-19. We review current knowledge on the pathophysiology of STEMI in patients with COVID-19, clinical presentation, outcomes, and the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on overall STEMI care.

The Challenge of High Coronary Thrombotic Events in Patients with ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction and COVID-19

The aim of this observational study was to describe the characteristics and outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-positive patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), with a special focus on factors associated with a high risk of coronary thrombosis and in-hospital mortality. Comparing the two groups of patients with STEMI separated according to the presence of SARS-CoV-2 infections, it was observed that COVID-19 patients were more likely to present with dyspnea (82.43% vs. 61.41%, p = 0.048) and cardiogenic shock (10.52% vs. 5.40%, p = 0.012). A longer total ischemia time was observed in COVID-19 patients, and they were twice as likely to undergo coronary angiography more than 12 hours after the onset of symptoms (19.29% vs. 10.13%, p = 0.024). In 10 of 57 COVID-19-positive patients, a primary PCI was not necessary, and only thromboaspiration was performed (17.54% vs. 2.70%, p < 0.001). Platelet level was inversely correlated (r = −0.512, p = 0.025) with a higher risk of coronary thrombosis without an atherosclerotic lesion. Using a cut-off value of 740 ng/ml, D-dimers predicted a higher risk of coronary thrombosis, with a sensitivity of 80% and a specificity of 66% (ROC area under the curve: 0.826, 95% CI: 0.716−0.935, p = 0.001). These are novel findings that raise the question of whether more aggressive antithrombotic therapy is necessary for selected COVID-19 and STEMI patients.

Mortality in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients without standard modifiable risk factors: A race disaggregated analysis

Background

Individuals who present with STEMI without the standard cardiovascular risk factors (SMuRFs) of diabetes, hypercholesterolemia, hypertension, and smoking, coined SMuRF-less are not uncommon. Little is known about their outcomes as a cohort and how they differ by race.

Methods & Results

We identified 431,615 admissions with STEMI in the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database 2015–2018, including patients with ≥ 1 SMuRF (n = 369,870) and those who were SMuRF-less (n = 234,745). SMuRF-less patients presented at a similar age (median age 63y vs 63y), were less likely to be female (33.6 % vs 34.6 %) and were almost twice as likely to present as a cardiac arrest (13.7 % vs 7.0 %), than those with ≥ 1 SMuRFs. SMuRF-less patients were less frequently in receipt of ICA (71.3 % vs 83.8 %) and PCI (58.0 % vs 72.2 %) compared to those with ≥ 1 SMuRF. Our race disaggregated analysis showed ethnic minority SMuRF-less patients were less likely than White patients to receive ICA and PCI, which was most apparent in Black patients with reduced odds of ICA (OR: 0.47, 95 % CI: 0.43–0.52) and PCI (OR: 0.46, 95 % CI: 0.52–0.50). Similarly, in ethnic minority subgroups within the SMuRF-less cohort, mortality and MACCE were significantly higher than in White patients. This was most profound in Black patients with in-hospital mortality (OR: 1.90, 95 % CI: 1.72–2.09) and MACCE (OR: 1.63, 95 % CI: 1.49–1.78) compared to White patients.

Conclusion

Ethnic Minority SMuRF-less patients were less likely than White SMuRF-less patients to receive ICA and PCI and had worse mortality outcomes.

Impact of the admitting ward on care quality and outcomes in non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: insights from a national registry

AIMS

Little is known about the association between the type of admission ward and quality of care and outcomes for non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI).

METHODS AND RESULTS

We analysed data from 337 155 NSTEMI admissions between 2010 and 2017 in the UK Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project (MINAP) database. The cohort was dichotomised according to receipt of care either on a medical (n = 142,876) or cardiac ward, inclusive of acute cardiac wards and cardiac care unit (n = 194,279) on admission to hospital. Patients admitted to a cardiac ward were younger (median age 70 y vs. 75 y, P < 0.001), and less likely to be female (33% vs. 40%, P < 0.001). Independent factors associated with admission to a cardiac ward included ischaemic ECG changes (OR: 1.20, 95% CI: 1.18-1.23) and prior percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (OR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.16-1.22). Patients admitted to a cardiac ward were more likely to receive optimal pharmacotherapy with statin (85% vs. 81%, P < 0.001) and dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) (91% vs. 88%, P < 0.001) on discharge, undergo invasive coronary angiography (78% vs. 59%, P < 0.001), and receive revascularisation in the form of PCI (52% vs. 36%, P < 0.001). Following multivariable logistic regression, the odds of inhospital all-cause mortality (OR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.70-0.81) and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (OR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.78-0.91) were lower in patients admitted to a cardiac ward.

CONCLUSION

Patients with NSTEMI admitted to a cardiac ward on admission were more likely to receive guideline directed management and had better clinical outcomes.

Ethnicity in Complex High-Risk but Indicated Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Types and Outcomes

Complex High-risk but indicated Percutaneous coronary interventions (CHiPs) is increasingly common in contemporary practice. However, data on ethnic differences in CHiP types, outcomes, and trends in patients with stable angina are limited; this is pertinent given the population of Black, Asian, and other ethnic minorities (BAME) in Europe is increasing. We conducted a retrospective analysis of CHiP procedures undertaken in patients with stable angina using data obtained from the BCIS (British Cardiovascular Intervention Society) registry (2006 to 2017). CHiP cases were identified and categorized by ethnicity into White and BAME groups. We then performed multivariable regression analysis and propensity score matching to determine adjusted odds ratios (aORs) of in-hospital mortality, major bleeding, and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebral events (MACCEs) in BAME compared with Whites. Of 424,290 procedure records, 105,949 were CHiP (25.0%) (White 89,038 [84%], BAME 16,911 [16%]). BAME patients were younger (median 68.1 vs 70.6 years). Previous coronary artery bypass surgery (33.4% vs 38.3%), followed by chronic total occlusion percutaneous coronary intervention (31.9% vs 32%) were common CHiP variables in both groups. The third common variable was age 80 years and above (23.6%) in White patients and severe vascular calcifications in BAME patients (18.8%). BAME patients had higher rates of diabetes (41.1 vs 23.6%), hypertension (68 vs 66.5%), previous percutaneous coronary intervention (43.7 vs 37.6%), and previous myocardial infarction (44.9 vs 42.5%), (p <0.001 for all). Mortality (aOR 1.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.8 to 1.5) and MACCE (aOR 1.0, 95% CI 0.8 to 1.1) odds were similar among the groups. Bleeding odds (aOR 0.7, 95% CI 0.6 to 0.9) were lower in BAME. In conclusion, CHiP procedures differed among the ethnic groups. BAME patients were younger and had worse cardiometabolic profiles. Similar odds of death and MACCE were seen in BAME compared with their White counterparts. Bleeding odds were 30% lower in the BAME group.

Association of Race and Ethnicity on the Management of Acute Non-ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction

Background

Prior studies have reported disparities by race in the management of acute myocardial infarction (MI), with many studies having limited covariates or now dated. We examined racial and ethnic differences in the management of MI, specifically non–ST‐segment‐elevation MI (NSTEMI), in a large, socially diverse cohort of insured patients. We hypothesized that the racial and ethnic disparities in the receipt of coronary angiography or percutaneous coronary intervention would persist in contemporary data.

Methods and Results

We identified individuals presenting with incident, type I NSTEMI from 2017 to 2019 captured by a health claims database. Race and ethnicity were categorized by the database as Asian, Black, Hispanic, or White. Covariates included demographics (age, sex, race, and ethnicity); Elixhauser variables, including cardiovascular risk factors and other comorbid conditions; and social factors of estimated annual household income and educational attainment. We examined rates of coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention by race and ethnicity and income categories and in multivariable‐adjusted models. We identified 87 094 individuals (age 73.8±11.6 years; 55.6% male; 2.6% Asian, 13.4% Black, 11.2% Hispanic, 72.7% White) with incident NSTEMI events from 2017 to 2019. Individuals of Black race were less likely to undergo coronary angiography (odds ratio [OR], 0.93; [95% CI, 0.89–0.98]) and percutaneous coronary intervention (OR, 0.86; [95% CI, 0.81–0.90]) than those of White race. Hispanic individuals were less likely (OR, 0.88; [95% CI, 0.84–0.93]) to undergo coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention (OR, 0.85; [95% CI, 0.81–0.89]) than those of White race. Higher annual household income attenuated differences in the receipt of coronary angiography across all racial and ethnic groups.

Conclusions

We identified significant racial and ethnic differences in the management of individuals presenting with NSTEMI that were marginally attenuated by higher household income. Our findings suggest continued evidence of health inequities in contemporary NSTEMI treatment.

Racism and Cardiology: A Global Call to Action

Racism and racial bias influence the lives and cardiovascular health of minority individuals. The fact that minority groups tend to have a higher burden of cardiovascular disease risk factors is often a result of racist policies that restrict opportunities to live in healthy neighbourhoods and have access to high-quality education and healthcare. The fact that minorities tend to have the worst outcomes when cardiovascular disease develops is often a result of institutional or individual racial bias encountered when they interact with the healthcare system. In this review, we discuss bias, discrimination, and structural racism from the viewpoints of cardiologists in Canada, the United Kingdom, and the US, and how racial bias impacts cardiovascular care. Finally, we discuss proposals to mitigate the impact of racism in our specialty.

Your neighborhood matters: A machine-learning approach to the geospatial and social determinants of health in 9-1-1 activated chest pain

Healthcare disparities in the initial management of patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) exist. Yet, the complexity of interactions between demographic, social, economic, and geospatial determinants of health hinders incorporating such predictors in existing risk stratification models. We sought to explore a machine-learning-based approach to study the complex interactions between the geospatial and social determinants of health to explain disparities in ACS likelihood in an urban community. This study identified consecutive patients transported by Pittsburgh emergency medical service for a chief complaint of chest pain or ACS-equivalent symptoms. We extracted demographics, clinical data, and location coordinates from electronic health records. Median income was based on US census data by zip code. A random forest (RF) classifier and a regularized logistic regression model were used to identify the most important predictors of ACS likelihood. Our final sample included 2400 patients (age 59 ± 17 years, 47% Females, 41% Blacks, 15.8% adjudicated ACS). In our RF model (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.71 ± 0.03) age, prior revascularization, income, distance from hospital, and residential neighborhood were the most important predictors of ACS likelihood. In regularized regression (akaike information criterion = 1843, bayesian information criterion = 1912, χ²  = 193, df = 10, p < 0.001), residential neighborhood remained a significant and independent predictor of ACS likelihood. Findings from our study suggest that residential neighborhood constitutes an upstream factor to explain the observed healthcare disparity in ACS risk prediction, independent from known demographic, social, and economic determinants of health, which can inform future work on ACS prevention, in-hospital care, and patient discharge.