Background Published data suggest worse outcomes in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients and concurrent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. Mechanisms remain unclear. Objectives The purpose of this study was to report the demographics, angiographic findings, and in-hospital outcomes of COVID-19 ACS patients and compare these with pre–COVID-19 cohorts. Methods From March 1, 2020 to July 31, 2020, data from 55 international centers were entered into a prospective, COVID-ACS Registry. Patients were COVID-19 positive (or had a high index of clinical suspicion) and underwent invasive coronary angiography for suspected ACS. Outcomes were in-hospital major cardiovascular events (all-cause mortality, re–myocardial infarction, heart failure, stroke, unplanned revascularization, or stent thrombosis). Results were compared with national pre–COVID-19 databases (MINAP [Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project] 2019 and BCIS [British Cardiovascular Intervention Society] 2018 to 2019). Results In 144 ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and 121 non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) patients, symptom-to-admission times were significantly prolonged (COVID-STEMI vs. BCIS: median 339.0 min vs. 173.0 min; p < 0.001; COVID NSTE-ACS vs. MINAP: 417.0 min vs. 295.0 min; p = 0.012). Mortality in COVID-ACS patients was significantly higher than BCIS/MINAP control subjects in both subgroups (COVID-STEMI: 22.9% vs. 5.7%; p < 0.001; COVID NSTE-ACS: 6.6% vs. 1.2%; p < 0.001), which remained following multivariate propensity analysis adjusting for comorbidities (STEMI subgroup odds ratio: 3.33 [95% confidence interval: 2.04 to 5.42]). Cardiogenic shock occurred in 20.1% of COVID-STEMI patients versus 8.7% of BCIS patients (p < 0.001). Conclusions In this multicenter international registry, COVID-19–positive ACS patients presented later and had increased in-hospital mortality compared with a pre–COVID-19 ACS population. Excessive rates of and mortality from cardiogenic shock were major contributors to the worse outcomes in COVID-19 positive STEMI patients.

Introduction: The intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) is used to prevent complications after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery, although some results are controversial and basal ventricular function may play a role. This study assessed the benefit of preoperative use of IABP, as stratified by the ventricular function, in a population submitted to high-surgical-risk CABG. Methods: Patients > 18 years old, with multiple coronary artery disease and thus candidates for CABG, were included. Cardiogenic shock, acute myocardial infarction (AMI), acute ventricle mechanical dysfunction, severe aortic regurgitation, tachyarrhythmia, massive pulmonary embolism, coagulopathy, or low life expectancy Escutia-Cuevas et al.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

The intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) is used to prevent complications after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery; although some results are controversial nowadays even contradictory. A new article on this field is published in this edition and shows that the risk factors for in-hospital mortality are the preoperative plasma creatinine level and cardiopulmonary bypass time in 177 patients. About the prophylactic use of the IABP regarding mortality the results reflected so far in meta-analyses have been highly contradictory between them, and the risk factors associated with it have been several and different. This lack of evidence has resulted in the continued variation of IABP use in these procedures. A large, multicenter RCT is certainly required to take the next step towards more definitive evidence, either for or against, the use of IABP in high-risk CABG. Until then, the unanswered questions regarding this topic will remain.