No abstract

COVID-19 infection can cause or worsen HF through a variety of mechanisms. Delivery of HF care has been significantly restructured during the COVID-19 pandemic.Future studies should address the impact of pandemic delays on outcomes in patients with HF.

No abstract

No abstract

IMPORTANCE Solid organ transplants have declined significantly during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic in the US. Limited data exist regarding changes in heart transplant (HT). OBJECTIVE To describe national and regional trends in waitlist inactivations, waitlist additions, donor recovery, and HT volume during COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This descriptive cross-sectional study used publicly available data from the United Network for Organ Sharing and US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, using 8 prespecified United Network for Organ Sharing regions. Adult (18 years or older) HT candidates listed and deceased donors recovered between January 19 to May 9, 2020. EXPOSURES COVID-19 pandemic. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Changes in waitlist inactivations, waitlist additions, deceased donor recovery, and transplant volumes from the pre-COVID-19 (January 19-March 15, 2020) to the COVID-19 era (March 15-May 9, 2020). Density mapping and linear regression with interrupted time series analysis were used to characterize changes over time and changes by region. RESULTS During the COVID-19 era, there were 600 waitlist inactivations compared with 343 during the pre-COVID era (75% increase). Waitlist additions decreased from 637 to 395 (37% reduction). These changes were most profound in the Northeast and Great Lakes regions with high rates of COVID-19. Deceased donor recovery decreased by 26% from 1878 to 1395; the most significant decrease occurred in the North Midwest despite low COVID-19 prevalence. Heart transplant volumes were significantly reduced across all regions except the Northwest. The largest decrease was seen in the Northeast where COVID-19 case rates were highest. From the pre-COVID-19 era to the COVID-19 era, there was significant regional variation in waitlist additions (eg, 69% decrease in the Northeast vs 8.5% increase in the South Midwest; P < .001) and deceased donor recovery (eg, 41% decrease in North Midwest vs 16% decrease in South Midwest; P = .02). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Heart transplant volumes have been significantly reduced in recent months, even in regions with a lower prevalence of COVID-19 cases. This has been accompanied by increased waitlist inactivations, decreased waitlist additions, and decreased donor recovery. Future studies are needed to determine if the COVID-19 pandemic is associated with changes in waitlist mortality.

Background The purpose of this study was to examine gender differences in authorship of manuscripts in select high‐impact cardiology journals during the early coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic. Methods and Results All manuscripts published between March 1, 2019 to June 1, 2019 and March 1, 2020 to June 1, 2020 in 4 high‐impact cardiology journals ( Journal of the American College of Cardiology , Circulation , JAMA Cardiology , and European Heart Journal ) were identified using bibliometric data. Authors' genders were determined by matching first name with predicted gender using a validated multinational database (Genderize.io) and manual adjudication. Proportions of women and men first, co‐first, senior, and co‐senior authors, manuscript types, and whether the manuscript was COVID‐19 related were recorded. In 2019, women were first authors of 176 (22.3%) manuscripts and senior authors of 99 (15.0%) manuscripts. In 2020, women first authored 230 (27.4%) manuscripts and senior authored 138 (19.3%) manuscripts. Proportions of woman first and senior authors were significantly higher in 2020 compared with 2019. Women were more likely to be first authors if the manuscript's senior author was a woman (33.8% for woman first/woman senior versus 23.4% for woman first/man senior; P <0.001). Women were less likely to be first authors of COVID‐19‐related original research manuscripts ( P =0.04). Conclusions Representation of women as key authors of manuscripts published in major cardiovascular journals increased during the early COVID‐19 pandemic compared with similar months in 2019. However, women were significantly less likely to be first authors of COVID‐19‐related original research manuscripts. Future investigation into the gender‐disparate impacts of COVID‐19 on academic careers is critical.

Background: Gender disparities in authorship of heart failure (HF) guideline citations and clinical trials have not been examined. Methods: We identified authors of publications referenced in Class I Recommendations in United States (n=173) and European (n=100) HF guidelines and of publications of all HF trials with >400 participants (n=118) published between 2001 and 2016. Authors’ genders were determined, and changes in authorship patterns over time were evaluated with linear regression and nonparametric testing. Results: The median proportion of women authors per publication was 20% (interquartile range [IQR], 8%–33%) in United States guidelines, 14% (IQR, 2%–20%) in European guidelines, and 11% (IQR, 4%–20%) in HF trials. The proportion of women authors increased modestly over time in United States and European guidelines’ references (β=0.005 and 0.003, respectively, from 1986 to 2016; P <0.001) but not in HF trials (12.5% [IQR, 0%–20%] in 2001–2004 to 8.9% [IQR, 0%–20%] in 2013–2016; P >0.50). Overall proportions of women as first or last authors in HF trials (16%) did not change significantly over time ( P =0.60). North American HF trials had the highest likelihood of having a woman as first or senior author (24%). HF trials with a woman first or senior author were associated with a higher proportion of enrolled female participants (39% versus 26%, P =0.01). Conclusions: In HF practice guidelines and trials, few women are authors of pivotal publications. Higher number of women authors is associated with higher enrollment of women in HF trials. Barriers to authorship and representation of women in HF guidelines and HF trial leadership need to be addressed.

No abstract