Background:The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus, has had a major impact on the behavior of patients, as well as on the delivery of healthcare services. With older and more medically vulnerable people tending to stay at home to avoid contracting the virus, it is unclear how the behavior of people with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) has changed. The aim of this study was to determine if delays in presentation and healthcare service delivery for AMI exist during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the same period a year prior. Methods:In this single-center, retrospective study, we evaluated patients admitted with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) or non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) during early months of the COVID-19 pandemic (March 11, 2020 to April 20, 2020 compared to patients admitted with same diagnosis during the same period a year prior.Results: There were 30 and 62 patients who presented with NSTE-MI in the pandemic and pre-pandemic eras, respectively. The median pain-to-door time was significantly larger during the pandemic compared to pre-pandemic era (1,885 (880, 5,732) vs. 606 (388, 944) min, P < 0.0001). There was a significant delay in door-toreperfusion time during the pandemic with a median time of 332 (182, 581) vs. 194 (92, 329) min (P = 0.0371). There were 24 (80%) and 25 (42%) patients who presented after 12 h of pain onset in pandemic and pre-pandemic eras, respectively (P = 0.0006). There were 47 and 60 patients who presented with STEMI during the pandemic timeframe of study and pre-pandemic timeframe, respectively. The median pain-to-door time during the pandemic was significantly larger than that of the pre-pandemic (620 (255, 1,500) vs. 349 (146, 659) min, P = 0.0141). There were 22 (47%) and 14 (24%) patients who presented after 12 h of pain onset in the pandemic and prepandemic eras, respectively (P = 0.0127). There was not a significant delay in door-to-reperfusion time (P = 0.9833). There were no differences in in-hospital death, stroke, or length of hospitalization between early and late presenters, as well as between pandemic and pre-pandemic eras. Conclusions:In conclusion, this study found that patients waited significantly longer during the pandemic to seek medical treatment for AMI compared to before the pandemic, and that pandemic-specific protocols may delay revascularization for NSTEMI patients. These findings resulted in more than a threefold increase from the onset of symptoms to revascularization increasing the risks for future complications such as left ventricular dysfunction and cardiovascular death. Efforts should be made to increase patients' awareness regarding consequences of delayed presentation, and to find a balance between hospital evaluation strategies and goals of minimizing total ischemic time.
Accumulating evidence suggests that influenza and influenza-like illnesses can act as a trigger for acute myocardial infarction. Despite these unprecedented times providers should not overlook acute coronary syndrome (ACS) guidelines, but may choose to modify the recommended approach in situations with confirmed or suspected COVID-19 disease. In this document, we suggest recommendations as to how to triage patients diagnosed with ACSs and provide with algorithms of how to manage the patients and decide the appropriate treatment options in the era of COVID-19 pandemic. We also address the inpatient logistics and discharge to follow-up considerations for the function of already established ACS network during the pandemic.
The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has changed the way patients seek medical attention and how medical services are provided. We sought to compare characteristics, clinical course, and outcomes of patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) during the pandemic compared to before it. This is a multicenter, retrospective cohort study of consecutive COVID-19 negative patients with AMI in Lithuania from March 11, 2020 to April 20, 2020 compared to patients admitted with the same diagnosis during the same period in 2019. All patients underwent angiography. Six-month follow-up was obtained for all patients. A total of 269 patients were included in this study, 107 (40.8%) of whom presented during the pandemic. Median pain-to-door times were significantly longer (858 [quartile 1=360, quartile 3 = 2600] vs. 385.5 [200, 745] mins, p<0.0001) and post-revascularization ejection fractions were significantly lower (35 [30, 45] vs. 45 [40, 50], p<0.0001) for patients presenting during vs. prior to the pandemic. While the in-hospital mortality rate did not differ, we observed a higher rate of six-month major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) for patients who presented during vs. prior to the pandemic (30.8% vs 13.6%, p = 0.0006). In conclusion, 34% fewer patients with AMI presented to the hospital during the COVID-19 pandemic, and those who did waited longer to present and experienced more 6-month MACE compared to patients admitted before the pandemic.
Introduction: Persistent coronary microcirculatory dysfunction (CMD) and elevated trimethylamine N-oxide (TMAO) levels after ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) may drive negative structural and electrical cardiac remodeling, resulting in new-onset atrial fibrillation (AF) and a decrease in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Aims: TMAO and CMD are investigated as potential predictors of new-onset AF and left ventricular remodeling following STEMI. Methods: This prospective study included STEMI patients who had primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) followed by staged PCI three months later. Cardiac ultrasound images were obtained at baseline and after 12 months to assess LVEF. Coronary flow reserve (CFR), and index of microvascular resistance (IMR) were assessed using the coronary pressure wire during the staged PCI. Microcirculatory dysfunction was defined as having an IMR value ≥25 U and CFR value <2.5 U. Results: A total of 200 patients were included in the study. Patients were categorized according to whether or not they had CMD. Neither group differed from the other with regards to known risk factors. Despite making up only 40.5% of the study population, females represented 67.4% of the CMD group p < 0.001. Similarly, CMD patients had a much higher prevalence of diabetes than those without CMD (45.7% vs. 18.2%; p < 0.001). At the one-year follow-up, the LVEF in the CMD group had decreased to significantly lower levels than those in the non-CMD group (40% vs. 50%; p < 0.001), whereas it had been higher in the CMD group at baseline (45% vs. 40%; p = 0.019). Similarly, during the follow-up, the CMD group had a greater incidence of AF (32.6% vs. 4.5%; p < 0.001). In the adjusted multivariable analysis, the IMR and TMAO were associated with increased odds of AF development (OR: 1.066, 95% CI: 1.018–1.117, p = 0.007), and (OR: 1.290, 95% CI: 1.002–1.660, p = 0.048), respectively. Similarly, elevated levels of IMR and TMAO were linked with decreased odds of LVEF improvement, while higher CFR values are related to a greater likelihood of LVEF improvement. Conclusions: CMD and elevated TMAO levels were highly prevalent three months after STEMI. Patients with CMD had an increased incidence of AF and a lower LVEF 12 months after STEMI.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.