Initial Single-Center ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Experience in New York Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has emerged as a highly contagious and lethal virus, devastating healthcare systems throughout the world. Following a period of stability, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic appears to be re-intensifying globally. As the virus continues to evolve, so does our understanding of its implications on ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). We sought to describe a single center STEMI experience at one of the epicenters during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS/MATERIALS: We conducted a retrospective, observational study comparing STEMI patients during the pandemic period (March 1 to August 31, 2020) to those with STEMI during the pre-pandemic period (March 1 to August 31, 2019) at NYU Langone Hospital - Long Island, a tertiary-care center in Nassau County, New York. Additionally, we describe our subset of COVID-19 patients with STEMI during the pandemic. RESULTS: The acute myocardial infarction (AMI) team was activated for 183 patients during both periods. There were a similar number of AMI team activations during the pandemic period (n = 93) compared to the pre-pandemic period (n = 90). Baseline characteristics did not differ during both periods; however, infection control measures and additional investigation were required to clarify the diagnosis during the pandemic, resulting in a signal toward longer door-to-balloon times (95.9 min vs. 74.4 min, p = 0.0587). We observed similar inpatient length of stay (LOS) (3.6 days vs. 5.0 days, p = 0.0901) and mortality (13.2% vs. 9.2%, p = 0.5876). There were 6 COVID-19-positive patients who presented with STEMI, of whom 4 were emergently taken to the cardiac catheterization laboratory with successful percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) performed in 3 patients. The 2 patients who were not offered primary PCI expired, as both were treated medically, one with thrombolytics. CONCLUSIONS: Our single-center study, in New York, at one of the epicenters of the pandemic, demonstrated a similar number of AMI team activations, mimicking the seasonal variability seen in 2019, but with a signal toward longer door-to-balloon time. Despite this, inpatient LOS and mortality remained similar.

Evaluation and Management of Concomitant Hypertrophic Obstructive Cardiomyopathy and Valvular Aortic Stenosis.

OPINION STATEMENT: The dilemma of the patient with both AS and LVOTO is now commonly encountered in clinical practice; indeed, physicians must be aware of the complex interaction and coexistent nature of both diseases, especially as both HOCM and TAVR have increased in awareness and prevalence. Importantly, the clinician must be aware of the complex interplay hemodynamically, with the two diseases confusing the TTE imaging and potentially affecting each other anatomically and clinically. There is no set guideline on how to approach this from a surgical or percutaneous approach, but we have outlined a set of recommendations which should serve the clinician and patient well. The three cases that are presented illustrate that methodical diagnosis in addition to the order of treatment do indeed matter. In the first case, there was AS and an underestimated LVOT gradient that was also present. Once the AS was corrected, the true LVOT gradient potential was evidenced and she decompensated, likely because there was a rapid decrease in afterload. Patients with concomitant LVOTO are not able to adjust quickly to the hemodynamic changes created by the rapid decline in afterload, as, for example, in HOCM patients who receive nitroglycerin. The second case demonstrated that when the LVOTO was severe and the AS nonsignificant (mild or moderate), the patient was able to live without symptoms for several years after successful alcohol septal ablation (ASA). She eventually needed an aortic valve and mitral valve replacement but that was postponed for several years until the AS became more significant, and the surgical risk was lowered by the elimination of the need for concomitant myectomy. In the last case, the patient was able to have both an ASA and TAVR within 3 months of each other without hemodynamic compromise. Indeed, this latter therapy sequence may be the best way to treat patients with both diseases in the future, as both ASA and TAVR continue to evolve into intermediate and lower-risk patient populations and the safety of ASA continues to be evident.