Background The COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound effect on general health care. We aimed to evaluate the effect of a nationwide lockdown in France on admissions to hospital for acute myocardial infarction, by patient characteristics and regional prevalence of the pandemic. Methods In this registry study, we collected data from 21 centres participating in the ongoing French Cohort of Myocardial Infarction Evaluation (FRENCHIE) registry, which collects data from all patients admitted for ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) or non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) within 48 h of symptom onset. We analysed weekly hospital admissions over 8 weeks: the 4 weeks preceding the institution of the lockdown and the 4 weeks following lockdown. The primary outcome was the change in the number of hospital admissions for all types of acute myocardial infarction, NSTEMI, and STEMI between the 4 weeks before lockdown and the 4 weeks after lockdown. Comparisons between categorical variables were made using χ² tests or Fisher's exact tests. Comparisons of continuous variables were made using Student's t tests or Mann-Whitney tests. Poisson regression was used to determine the significance of change in hospital admissions over the two periods, after verifying the absence of overdispersion. Age category, region, and type of acute myocardial infarction (STEMI or NSTEMI) were used as covariables. The FRENCHIE cohort is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04050956. Findings Between Feb 17 and April 12, 2020, 1167 patients were consecutively admitted within 48 h of acute myocardial infarction (583 with STEMI, 584 with NSTEMI) and were included in the study. Admissions for acute myocardial infarction decreased between the periods before and after lockdown was instituted, from 686 before to 481 after lockdown (30% decrease; incidence rate ratio 0⋅69 [95% CI 0⋅51-0⋅70]). Admissions for STEMI decreased from 331 to 252 (24%; 0⋅72 [0⋅62-0⋅85]), and admissions for NSTEMI decreased from 355 to 229 (35%; 0⋅64 [0⋅55-0⋅76]) following institution of the lockdown, with similar trends according to sex, risk factors, and regional prevalence of hospital admissions for COVID-19. Interpretation A marked decrease in hospital admissions was observed following the lockdown, irrespective of patient characteristics and regional prevalence of COVID-19. Health authorities should be aware of these findings, in order to adapt their message if the COVID-19 pandemic persists or recurs, or in case of future major epidemics. Funding Recherche Hospitalo-Universitaire en Santé iVasc.

Recent controversy over statins could induce a large proportion of patients to stop their medication and generate a large number of major cardiovascular events.

No abstract

La pandémie COVID-19 a déferlé sur les hôpitaux et ceux-ci ont dû s’adapter dans l’urgence. On sait qu’une crise sanitaire de cette ampleur peut générer des troubles psychiques touchant particulièrement les soignants exposés. Cette pandémie est particulière par son caractère brutal et global, impactant les personnels dans leur sphère professionnelle mais aussi familiale et sociale. L’étude COV IMPACT est une évaluation précoce réalisée sur deux semaines en mai 2020, de la perception par les agents hospitaliers des bouleversements induits dans leur activité professionnelle par l’épidémie. L’enquête a été réalisée par auto-questionnaire proposé à l’ensemble des personnels des hôpitaux de Béziers et Montfermeil. Les conditions de travail réadaptées ont généré un surcroît de fatigue physique pour 62% des agents. L’épuisement moral a été rapporté par 36% des sondés. Celui-ci était sous-tendu par le stress de contracter l’infection (72%) mais surtout de la transmettre à ses proches (89%) avec une perception large d’un risque vital (41% des sondés). Ce stress touchait toutes les catégories socio-professionnelles (CSP) indépendamment de l’exposition au COVID. Les changements d’organisation, le déficit d’information ainsi que le manque d’équipements de protection ont été des facteurs d’insécurité majeurs au début de l’épidémie. Un travail sur les mesures d’accompagnement est nécessaire. Il devrait cibler la diffusion de l’information, notamment vers les plus jeunes, ainsi que l’apport d’’un soutien psychologique ou matériel plus large, au-delà du personnel soignant et des secteurs COVID.

Background Hydroxychloroquine combined with azithromycin (HCQ/AZI) has initially been used against coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). In this retrospective study, we assessed the clinical effects of HCQ/AZI, with a 28-days follow-up. Methods In a registry-study which included patients hospitalized for COVID-19 between March 15 and April 2, 2020, we compared patients who received HCQ/AZI to those who did not, regarding a composite outcome of mortality and mechanical ventilation with a 28-days follow-up. QT was monitored for patients treated with HCQ/AZI. Were excluded patients in intensive care units, palliative care and ventilated within 24 hours of admission. Three analyses were performed to adjust for selection bias: propensity score matching, multivariable survival, and inverse probability score weighting (IPSW) analyses. Results Overall, 203 patients were included: 60 patients treated by HCQ/AZI and 143 control patients. During the 28-days follow-up, 32 (16.3%) patients presented the primary outcome and 23 (12.3%) patients died. Propensity-score matching identified 52 unique pairs of patients with similar characteristics. In the matched cohort (n = 104), HCQ/AZI was not associated with the primary composite outcome (log-rank p-value = 0.16). In the overall cohort (n = 203), survival and IPSW analyses also found no benefit from HCQ/AZI. In the HCQ/AZI group, 11 (18.3%) patients prolonged QT interval duration, requiring treatment cessation. Conclusions HCQ/AZI combination therapy was not associated with lower in-hospital mortality and mechanical ventilation rate, with a 28-days follow-up. In the HCQ/AZI group, 18.3% of patients presented a prolonged QT interval requiring treatment cessation, however, control group was not monitored for this adverse event, making comparison impossible.