Aims  The aim of this study was to determine the contemporary use of reperfusion therapy in the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) member and affiliated countries and adherence to ESC clinical practice guidelines in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Methods and results  Prospective cohort (EURObservational Research Programme STEMI Registry) of hospitalized STEMI patients with symptom onset <24 h in 196 centres across 29 countries. A total of 11 462 patients were enrolled, for whom primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (total cohort frequency: 72.2%, country frequency range 0–100%), fibrinolysis (18.8%; 0–100%), and no reperfusion therapy (9.0%; 0–75%) were performed. Corresponding in-hospital mortality rates from any cause were 3.1%, 4.4%, and 14.1% and overall mortality was 4.4% (country range 2.5–5.9%). Achievement of quality indicators for reperfusion was reported for 92.7% (region range 84.8–97.5%) for the performance of reperfusion therapy of all patients with STEMI <12 h and 54.4% (region range 37.1–70.1%) for timely reperfusion. Conclusions  The use of reperfusion therapy for STEMI in the ESC member and affiliated countries was high. Primary PCI was the most frequently used treatment and associated total in-hospital mortality was below 5%. However, there was geographic variation in the use of primary PCI, which was associated with differences in in-hospital mortality.

No abstract

Background: Healthcare workforce should mirror the population in representing patients' diversity; however, in certain medical specialties like cardiology, there is a significant under-representation of females in fellowship programs. There is limited data discussing this issue in the Middle East, and up to our knowledge, no prior literature has cast a light on this subject in Iraq. Main text: Women represent not a minority but rather a negligible proportion of cardiologists in the Middle East, in general, and in Iraq, in particular, as over two decades, recruiting females in cardiology training never progressed. Women are facing many challenges that explain this gender gap, mainly work-life balance and risk of exposure to radiation in addition to society's perceptions in the Middle East that underestimate women in interventional specialties. Conclusions: Serious efforts and forward steps should be taken by decision makers in cardiology fellowship programs and national cardiology societies to bridge this gender gap in order to improve cardiovascular care for both genders regardless of social barriers and traditional customs and to offer more access of care to those female patients who wish to be treated by female doctors based on their personal convictions.

BACKGROUND: Since the WHO declaration of COVID-19 being a global pandemic, the population in general and health-care providers, in particular, became under extraordinary pressure that remarkably impacts their decisions at multiple levels as all of us should make decisions quickly while being uncertain in many times. CASE REPORT: We are reporting a 64-year-old lady with a medical history of atrial fibrillation and mitral regurgitation that treated with digoxin and warfarin therapy, she was suspected to be a COVID-19 case and prescribed empirical hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin combination without proper adjustment of her baseline therapy, accordingly she developed adverse effect of this combination in the form of digoxin toxicity and long QT, this case highlights how this unprecedented pandemic affects the decision-making of physicians. CONCLUSION: We should be critical and vigilant in making a decision of prescription or marketing non-evidence-based therapy, and when we are obligated for this decision, we should take all precautions to minimize the adverse effects of these drugs.

Background As the elderly represent a substantial proportion of medical care beneficiaries, and there is limited data about age disparity in emerging countries, this study sought to investigate the impact of age on the management in patients with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE-ACS). Results Two hundred patients with NSTE-ACS enrolled prospectively, patients’ data, pharmacotherapy, management strategy as well timing to catheterization were documented. Patients grouped into ≥ 65 years versus < 65 years; 32.5% were ≥ 65-year-old. The older group presented as high GRACE risk (Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events) (67.7% versus 15.6%). Elderly patients were less likely to be referred for catheterization compared with younger counterparts (55.4% versus 76.3%, p = 0.003). Within low risk class patients, none of the elderly versus 9.33% of younger patients were catheterized within 2 h; in the same line, none of the elderly versus 16% of younger patients were catheterized within 24 h. Alternatively, at high risk class, 6.81% of the elderly and none of the younger patients were catheterized within 2 h. On the univariate analysis of variables to predict invasive strategy, presence of history of prior IHD, diabetes, absent in-hospital acute heart failure or atrial fibrillation/flutter, higher haemoglobin and lower creatinine levels predicted the use of invasive strategy, while on multivariate analysis, acute heart failure (95% CI − 0.38 to − 0.41, p = 0.01), lower haemoglobin (95% CI 0.002–0.07, p = 0.03), and atrial fibrillation/flutter (95% CI − 0.48 to − 0.02, p = 0.03) predicted conservative strategy. The elderly were more likely to have acute heart failure (32.3% versus 14.8%, p = 0.004), same as stroke (3.1% versus none, p = 0.04). Conclusions Less-invasive strategy used in the elderly with NSTE-ACS compared with younger counterparts, yet age was not a predictor of catheterization underuse on multivariate analysis. It is crucial to bridge the age gap in the healthcare system in setting of ACS management by grasping the attention of decision makers and emphasizing on the adherence of healthcare providers to the guidelines to improve cardiovascular care and outcomes.

Corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic represents a global unprecedented healthcare crisis that results in respiratory syndrome and can cause remarkable cardiovascular impacts in form of myocardial injury, myocarditis, heart failure and arrhythmia. This review aimed to provide clinical landscape of this novel virus in the context of cardiovascular system involvement, in addition to explore future perspectives regarding response of healthcare system to this outbreak. The study showed that elderly patients and those with comorbidities are most susceptible for this infection, and will have the worst prognosis. Poor prognostic determinants for this disease were higher C-reactive protein, IL-6, ferritin, serum troponin and NT-ProBNP. Considering prominent role of COVID19 pandemic on cardiovascular health and care on multiple levels there is no time better than now for cardiology community to play a key role in fighting this pandemic globally in form of solidarity with other specialities and accelerating knowledge about this health threat in addition to adopt new perspectives on learning and training to face this unprecedented crisis.

No abstract

Background Risk stratification is the cornerstone in managing patients with Non-ST Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes (NSTE-ACS) and can attenuate the unjustified variability in treatment and guide the intervention decision notwithstanding its impact on better healthcare resources use. This study sought to disclose real adherence to guidelines in risk stratification of NSTE-ACS patients and in adopting intervention decision in practice. Methods Multicentre prospective study recruited NSTE-ACS patients. Baseline characteristics were collected, TIMI (Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction) and GRACE (Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events) scores were calculated, management strategy as well as timing to intervention were recorded. Results n. = 150, 72% of them were males, mean age was (59 ± 12.32) years. TIMI score was calculated in 5.3% of patients with none of them had GRACE score calculated. Invasive strategy was adopted in 85.24 and 82.7% of low GRACE and TIMI risk categories respectively, while invasive approach used in 42.85 and 40% of high GRACE and TIMI risk categories respectively. The immediate intervention in less than 2 hours was more to be used in low-risk categories while the high-risk and very high-risk patients whom were managed invasively were catheterized within >72 h; or more frequently to be non-catheterized at all. Sixty percent of those with acute heart failure, 80.76% of those with ongoing chest pain, 85% of those with dynamic ST changes same as 80% of those with cardiogenic shock were treated conservatively. Using multivariable analysis older age, ongoing chest pain and cardiogenic shock predicted conservative approach. Conclusions There is striking underuse of risk scores in practice that can contribute to treatment-risk paradox in managing NSTE-ACS in form of depriving those with higher risk from invasive strategy despite being the most beneficiaries. The paradox did not only involve the very high-risk patients but also the very high-risk criteria like ongoing chest pain and cardiogenic shock predicted conservative approach, this highlights that the entire approach to patients with NSTE-ACS should be reconsidered, regardless of the use of risk scores in clinical practice. Audit programs activation in middle eastern countries can inform policymakers to put a limit to the treatment-risk paradox for better cardiovascular care and outcomes.