Background COVID-19 affects healthcare resource allocation, which could lead to treatment delay and poor outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). We assessed the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on AMI outcomes. Methods We compared outcomes of patients admitted for acute ST-elevation MI (STEMI) and non-STEMI (NSTEMI) during a non-COVID-19 pandemic period (January–February 2019; Group 1, n = 254) and a COVID-19 pandemic period (January–February 2020; Group 2, n = 124). Results For STEMI patients, the median of first medical contact (FMC) time, door-to-balloon time, and total myocardial ischemia time were significantly longer in Group 2 patients (all p < 0.05). Primary percutaneous intervention was performed significantly more often in Group 1 patients than in Group 2 patients, whereas thrombolytic therapy was used significantly more often in Group 2 patients than in Group 1 patients (all p < 0.05). However, the rates of and all-cause 30-day mortality and major adverse cardiac event (MACE) were not significantly different in the two periods (all p > 0.05). For NSTEMI patients, Group 2 patients had a higher rate of conservative therapy, a lower rate of reperfusion therapy, and longer FMC times (all p < 0.05). All-cause 30-day mortality and MACE were only higher in NSTEMI patients during the COVID-19 pandemic period (p < 0.001). Conclusions COVID-19 pandemic causes treatment delay in AMI patients and potentially leads to poor clinical outcome in NSTEMI patients. Thrombolytic therapy should be initiated without delay for STEMI when coronary intervention is not readily available; for NSTEMI patients, outcomes of invasive reperfusion were better than medical treatment.
Whether the clinical outcomes of stent thrombosis (ST) are different when stratified by time of occurrence remains unclear. The objective of this study was to compare the short-and long-term clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for early stent thrombosis (EST) versus late stent thrombosis (LST) and very late stent thrombosis (VLST). We enrolled eligible studies searched from the main electronic databases (EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane). The primary endpoints were in-hospital, 30-day, 1-year and long-term mortality. The secondary endpoints included recurrent stent thrombosis (RST) and target vessel/lesion revascularization (TVR/TLR) during hospitalization, at 30 days, at 1 year and at long-term follow-up. A total of 23 studies with 17,592 patients were included. Compared with mortality rates of the late and very late thrombosis (LST/VLST) group, in-hospital (P = 0.004), 30-day (P < 0.00001), 1-year (P < 0.00001) and long-term mortality rates (P = 0.04) were significantly higher in the EST group. The in-hospital TVR/TLR rates were similar between the EST group and the LST/VLST group. However, a higher trend in TVR/TLR rate at 30 days and a significantly higher TVR/TLR rate at 1 year (P = 0.002) as well as at long-term follow up (P = 0.009) were found in the EST group. EST patients also trended toward higher risk of RST in both short-and long-term follow-up than LST/VLST patients, although differences were not statistically significant. After PCI treatment, patients with EST have worse clinical outcomes in both short-and long-term follow-up than patients with LST/VLST. Further studies are warranted to determine the optimal treatment strategies for EST. Keywords Stent thrombosis • Outcomes • Percutaneous coronary intervention • Meta-analysis Highlights • This is the first meta-analysis to investigate the associations between the timing of ST occurrence and the clinical outcomes of ST. • Patients with EST have worse clinical outcomes in both short-and long-term follow-up than patients with LST/ VLST. • Further studies are warranted to determine the optimal treatment strategies for EST. Yi-Xing Yang and Yin Liu have contributed equally to this work.
Background. Although drug-eluting stents (DES) have reduced the rates of in-stent restenosis (ISR) compared with bare-metal stents (BMS), DES related ISR (DES-ISR) still occurs and outcomes of DES-ISR remain unclear. The objective of this meta-analysis was to investigate the long-term clinical outcomes of patients with DES-ISR compared with patients with BMS related ISR (BMS-ISR) after the treatment of DES or drug-eluting balloon (DEB). Methods and results. We searched the literature in the main electronic databases including PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. The primary endpoints were target lesion revascularization (TLR) and target vessel revascularization (TVR). The secondary endpoints included all cause death (ACD), cardiac death (CD), myocardial infarction (MI), stent thrombosis or re-in-stent restenosis (ST/RE-ISR), and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs). A total of 19 studies with 6256 participants were finally included in this meta-analysis. Results showed that the rates of TLR (P<0.00001), TVR (P<0.00001), CD (P=0.02), ST/RE-ISR (P<0.00001), and MACEs (P<0.00001) were significantly higher in the DES-ISR group than in the BMS-ISR group. No significant differences were found between the two groups in the rates of MI (P=0.05) and ACD (P=0.21). Conclusions. Our study demonstrated that patients with DES-ISR had worse clinical outcomes at the long-term follow-up than patients with BMS-ISR after the treatment of DES or DEB, suggesting that DES and DEB may be more effective for BMS-ISR than that for DES-ISR. Positive prevention of DES-ISR is indispensable and further studies concentrating on detecting the predictors of outcomes of DES-ISR are required.
Background: Several studies have demonstrated that using a higher dose of statin can easily induce liver injury and myopathy. Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) is a well-established modifiable risk factor for cardiovascular disease; however, the large majority of Chinese patients cannot meet the target level of LDL-C recommended by the Chinese expert consensus. Evolocumab has been demonstrated to reduce LDL-C by approximately 60% in many studies. Nevertheless, whether combined evolocumab and moderate-intensity statin is as effective in lowering LDL-C and decreasing incidence of MACE in Chinese patients presenting with the acute phase of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) remains unknown. Therefore, the “Evolocumab added to Moderate-Intensity Statin therapy on LDL-C lowering and cardiovascular adverse events in patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome” (EMSIACS) is conducted.Methods: The EMSIACS is a prospective, randomized, open-label, parallel-group, multicenter study involving analyzing the feasibility and efficacy of evolocumab added to moderate-intensity statin therapy on lowering LDL-C levels in adult Chinese patients hospitalized for acute phase ACS. The sample size calculation is based on the primary outcome, and 500 patients will be planned to recruit. Patients are randomized in evolocumab arm (evolocumab 140mg every 2weeks plus rosuvastatin 10mg/day or atorvastatin 20mg/day) and statin-only arm (rosuvastatin 10mg/day or atorvastatin 20mg/day). The primary outcome is the percentage change in LDL-C in weeks 4 and week 12 after treatment. The secondary outcome is the occurrence of MACE after 12weeks and 1year of treatment.Discussion: If the EMSIACS trial endpoints prove statistically significant, the evolocumab added to moderate-intensity statin therapy will have the potential to effectively lower subjects’ LDL-C levels, especially for the Chinese patients with acute phase ACS. However, if the risk of MACE is not significantly different between the two groups, we may extend follow-up time for secondary outcome when the clinical trial is over.Clinical trial registration: The study is registered to ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04100434), which retrospectively registered on November 24, 2020.
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.