Changes in the investigation and management of suspected myocardial infarction and injury during COVID-19: a multi-centre study using routinely collected healthcare data.

Objective: The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with a reduction in the incidence of myocardial infarction (MI) diagnosis, in part because patients were less likely to present to hospital. Whether changes in clinical decision making with respect to the investigation and management of patients with suspected MI also contributed to this phenomenon is unknown. Methods: Multicentre retrospective cohort study in three UK centres contributing data to the National Institute for Health Research Health Informatics Collaborative. Patients presenting to the Emergency Department (ED) of these centres between 1st January 2020 and 1st September 2020 were included. Three time epochs within this period were defined based on the course of the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic: pre-pandemic (epoch 1), lockdown (epoch 2), post-lockdown (epoch 3). Results: During the study period, 10,670 unique patients attended the ED with chest pain or dyspnoea, of whom 6,928 were admitted. Despite fewer total ED attendances in epoch 2, patient presentations with dyspnoea were increased (p < 0.001), with greater likelihood of troponin testing in both chest pain (p = 0.001) and dyspnoea (p < 0.001). There was a dramatic reduction in elective and emergency cardiac procedures (both p < 0.001), and greater overall mortality of patients (p < 0.001), compared to the pre-pandemic period. Positive COVID-19 and/or troponin test results were associated with increased mortality (p < 0.001), though the temporal risk profile differed. Conclusions: The first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with significant changes not just in presentation, but also the investigation, management, and outcomes of patients presenting with suspected myocardial injury or MI.

Conduction Abnormalities and Permanent Pacemaker Implantation After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Using the Repositionable LOTUS Device: The United Kingdom Experience.

OBJECTIVES: The authors report the incidence of pacemaker implantation up to hospital discharge and the factors influencing pacing rate following implantation of the LOTUS bioprosthesis (Boston Scientific, Natick, Massachusetts) in the United Kingdom. BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is associated with a significant need for permanent pacemaker implantation. Pacing rates vary according to the device used. The REPRISE II (Repositionable Percutaneous Replacement of Stenotic Aortic Valve Through Implantation of Lotus Valve System) trial reported a pacing rate of 29% at 30 days after implantation of the LOTUS device. METHODS: Data were collected retrospectively on 228 patients who had the LOTUS device implanted between March 2013 and February 2015 across 10 centers in the United Kingdom. Twenty-seven patients (12%) had pacemakers implanted pre-procedure and were excluded from the analysis. RESULTS: Patients were aged 81.2 ± 7.7 years; 50.7% were male. The mean pre-procedural QRS duration was 101.7 ± 20.4 ms. More than one-half of the cohort (n = 111, 55%) developed new left bundle branch block (LBBB) following the procedure. Permanent pacemakers were implanted in 64 patients (32%) with a median time to insertion of 3.0 ± 3.4 days. Chief indications for pacing were atrioventricular (AV) block (n = 46, 72%), or LBBB with 1st degree AV block (n = 11, 17%). Amongst those who received a pacemaker following TAVR the pre-procedural electrocardiogram findings included: No conduction disturbance (n = 41, 64%); 1st degree AV block (n = 10, 16%); right bundle branch block (n = 6, 9%) and LBBB (n = 5, 8%). LBBB (but not permanent pacemaker) occurred more frequently in patients who had balloon aortic valvuloplasty before TAVR (odds ratio [OR]: 1.25; p = 0.03). Pre-procedural conduction abnormality (composite of 1st degree AV block, hemiblock, right bundle branch block, LBBB) was independently associated with the need for permanent pacemaker (OR: 2.54; p = 0.048). The absence of aortic valve calcification was also associated with a higher pacing rate (OR: 0.55; p = 0.031). Multivariate regression analysis did not show an independent association between depth of implant, valve oversizing, balloon post-dilatation, and the need for pacing post-procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Following implantation of the repositionable LOTUS valve, 55% of patients developed LBBB and 32% of patients required a pacemaker during their index hospital admission. Patients with pre-procedural conduction disturbance and non-calcified aortic valves were more likely to need pacing. No other anatomic features were identified with increased pacing requirement with the LOTUS device.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Using the Repositionable LOTUS Valve: United Kingdom Experience.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to present the U.K. experience to date with the second-generation LOTUS bioprosthesis (Boston Scientific, Natick, Massachusetts). BACKGROUND: First-generation transcatheter aortic valves have limitations. Second-generation repositionable valves may improve on some of those limitations. METHODS: Prospectively collected data relating to procedural and in-hospital outcome was analyzed from 10 implantation centers in the United Kingdom. RESULTS: Implants in 228 patients age 81.4 ± 7.6 years were studied; 53.5% were male. Mean logistic EuroScore was 17.5 ± 12.4. One hundred eighty-seven (82.0%) were undertaken for aortic stenosis, 7 (3.1%) for aortic regurgitation, and 34 (14.9%) for mixed aortic valve disease. A total of 67.1% of cases were done under local anesthetic and/or sedation with transfemoral access in 94.7% and transaortic in 5.3%. Three device sizes were used: 23 mm (n = 66, 28.9%), 25 mm (n = 39, 17.1%), and 27 mm (n = 123, 53.9%). The valve was successfully deployed in 99.1% of procedures. After implantation, the mean aortic gradient was 11.4 ± 5.4 mm Hg and aortic valve area 1.6 ± 0.5 cm(2). In-hospital mortality was 1.8% (n = 4). Complications included cardiac tamponade (1.8%), conversion to sternotomy (1.3%), stroke (3.9%), vascular access-related (7.0%), and acute kidney injury (7.9%). The incidence of moderate/severe aortic regurgitation was 0.8% (n = 2). A total of 31.8% of patients required new permanent pacemaker implantation. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis represents the largest published series on use of the LOTUS valve. Outcomes using this valve are excellent. In-hospital mortality is very low. Complication rates are low, and the LOTUS valve improves on first-generation valves, particularly with regard to residual aortic regurgitation.

How should I treat stent dislodgement in a STEMI patient resulting in dissection of left main and left circumflex arteries?

BACKGROUND: A 52-year-old female presented with acute anterior ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) within one hour of symptom onset to the emergency department. She was referred for urgent primary angioplasty. INVESTIGATION: Physical examination, laboratory investigations, ECG, urgent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). DIAGNOSIS: Single-vessel coronary artery disease (SVD). TREATMENT: Intended to stent culprit lesion. However, stent dislodged in left main coronary artery (LMCA) during attempted PCI to diffuse mid segment of left anterior descending (LAD). Initial attempt failed to retrieve the dislodged stent with snare. Dislodged stent removed with multiple wire technique, complicated by severe dissection in LAD and left circumflex artery back into the LMCA. The stent was trapped at tip of 6 Fr right femoral sheath, unable to be withdrawn. What next?