AimsSpontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) was underdiagnosed and poorly understood for decades. It is increasingly recognized as an important cause of myocardial infarction (MI) in women. We aimed to assess the natural history of SCAD, which has not been adequately explored.

No abstract

Introduction-While trials comparing antiplatelet strategies after coronary intervention report average risks of bleeding and ischemia in a population, there is limited information to guide choices based on individual patient risks, particularly beyond one year after treatment.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has forced dramatic changes to the healthcare systems throughout the world. Time-sensitive management of cardiovascular emergencies such as ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) has yet to be evaluated in the context of these new policies, particularly in so-called “hot spot” cities. Methods We evaluated the early impact of the pandemic on STEMI performance in the Greater Montreal Area. A total of 167 patients from 3 different study periods were included. Patients presenting in the lockdown period from mid-March to mid-May 2020 (Group C, 53 patients) were compared to those from mid-March to mid-May 2019 (Group A, 60 patients) and the 2020 pre-COVID-19 period (Group B, 54 patients). Results The number of STEMI admissions was unaffected during the lockdown. However, significantly longer delays between symptom onset and first medical contact (FMC) were noted (Group C 189.0 IQR [70.0, 840.0] min vs. Group A 103.0 IQR [42.5, 263.0] min vs. Group B 91.0 IQR [38.0, 235.5 min], P= 0.007). In contrast, additional safety protocols do not appear to have significantly affected delays between FMC and first intracoronary device activation (Group C 102 IQR [73.0, 133.0] min vs. Group A 104 IQR [87.0, 146.0] min vs. Group B 99.5 IQR [80.0, 150.0] min, P=0.37). Patients that presented during the outbreak were more likely to be unstable with a higher incidence of Killip classes II-IV compared to groups A and B (28.3% vs. 18.3% vs. 5.6% respectively, P=0.008). Worse in-hospital outcomes were also noted with a significantly higher rate of major adverse cardiac events (Group A 5.0% vs. Group B 11.1% vs. Group C 22.6%, P=0.007). Conclusion During the lockdown period, many patients appear to have been reluctant to present to hospitals. This was associated with more unstable STEMI presentations and worse in-hospital course. Importantly, the health care system appears able to ensure timely acute cardiac care while ensuring that COVID-19 protocols are respected.

No abstract