Symptoms-to-emergency-call timing delay in acute coronary syndrome before and during COVID-19: independent predictors and their impact on mortality.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic severely impacted global health. The aim of this study was to compare predictors of symptoms-to-emergency-call timing delay in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and their impact on mortality before and during the COVID-19 outbreak. METHODS: We collected sociodemographic, clinical data, procedural features, preadmission and intra-hospital outcomes of consecutive patients admitted for ACS in seventeen Italian centers from March to April 2018, 2019, and 2020. RESULTS: In 2020, a 32.92% reduction in ACS admissions was observed compared to 2018 and 2019. Unstable angina, typical and atypical symptoms, and intermittent angina were identified as significant predictors of symptoms-to-emergency-call timing delay before and during the COVID-19 pandemic (P<0.005 for all the items). Differently from 2018-2019, during the pandemic, hypertension and dyspnea (P=0.002 versus P=0.490 and P=0.001 vs. P=0.761 for 2018-2019 and 2020, respectively) did not result as predictors of delay in symptoms-to-emergency-call timing. Among these predictors, only the atypical symptoms (HR 3.36; 95% CI: 1.172-9.667, P=0.024) in 2020 and the dyspnea (HR 2.64; 95% CI: 1.345-5.190, P=0.005) in 2018-2019 resulted significantly associated with higher mortality. Finally, the family attendance at the onset of the symptoms resulted in a reduction in symptoms-to-emergency-call timing (in 2020 P<0.001; CI: -1710.73; -493.19) and in a trend of reduced mortality (HR 0.31; 95% CI: 0.089-1.079, P=0.066) in 2020. CONCLUSIONS: During the COVID-19 outbreak, atypical symptoms and family attendance at ACS onset were identified, respectively, as adverse and favorable predictors of symptoms-to-emergency-call timing delay and mortality.

Multi-imaging evaluation and long-term outcome of a patient with chest pain and an anomalous right coronary artery arising from pulmonary artery: a case report.

Background: Anomalous right coronary artery from pulmonary artery (ARCAPA) is a rare coronary anomaly. Adult patients usually present with few symptoms due to extensive collateral network from left coronary artery, with little/absent symptoms. Few data exist regarding surgical vs. conservative strategy for paucisymptomatic cases. Moreover, consensus is lacking. Case summary: We describe the case of a 52-year-old male patient with undiagnosed ARCAPA, who acceded to our emergency department with suspected acute myocardial infarction and was discharged with medical therapy after demonstration of mild ischaemia at myocardial perfusion imaging with dipyridamole and bicycle exercise test. Discussion: The patient completed 2-year event-free follow up. After complete imaging assessment and thorough clinical evaluation, medical management could be regarded as valid alternative to surgery for paucisymptomatic ARCAPA patients with evidence of limited ischaemia.

The Incidence and Impact of In-Hospital Bleeding in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic increased the complexity of the clinical management and pharmacological treatment of patients presenting with an Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS). AIM: to explore the incidence and prognostic impact of in-hospital bleeding in patients presenting with ACS before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We evaluated in-hospital Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) major and minor bleeding among 2851 patients with ACS from 17 Italian centers during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic (i.e., March-April 2020) and in the same period in the previous two years. RESULTS: The incidence of in-hospital TIMI major and minor bleeding was similar before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. TIMI major or minor bleeding was associated with a significant threefold increase in all-cause mortality, with a similar prognostic impact before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: the incidence and clinical impact of in-hospital bleeding in ACS patients was similar before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. We confirmed a significant and sizable negative prognostic impact of in-hospital bleeding in ACS patients.

Interrupted versus uninterrupted novel oral anticoagulant peri-implantation of cardiac device: A single-center randomized prospective pilot trial.

BACKGROUND: Many patients requiring cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation are on long-term oral anticoagulant therapy. While continuation of warfarin has been shown to be safe and reduce bleeding complications compared to interruption of warfarin therapy and heparin bridging, it is not known which novel oral anticoagulants (NOAC) regimen (interrupted vs uninterrupted) is better in this setting. METHODS: One-hundred and one patients were randomized to receive CIED implantation with either interrupted or uninterrupted/continuous NOAC therapy before surgery. No heparin was used in either treatment arm. The primary end-point was the presence of a clinically significant pocket hematoma after CIED implantation. The secondary end-point was a composite of other major bleeding events, device-related infection, thrombotic events, and device-related admission length postdevice implantation. RESULTS: Both treatment groups were equally balanced for baseline variables and concomitant medications. One clinically significant pocket hematoma occurred in the uninterrupted NOAC group and none in the interrupted group (P  =  0.320). There was no difference in other bleeding complications. No thrombotic events were observed in either of the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the paucity of bleeding events, data from this pilot study suggest that uninterrupted NOAC therapy for CIED implantation appears to be as safe as NOAC interruption and does not increase bleeding complications.

Should pre-operative left atrial volume receive more consideration in patients with degenerative mitral valve disease undergoing mitral valve surgery?

BACKGROUND: Severe primary mitral regurgitation (MR) carries a significant incidence of mortality and morbidity. Though a number of prognostic factors have been identified, the best timing for mitral valve repair is still debated. We assessed the role of Left Atrial Volume Indexed (LAVI) as predictor of adverse events after mitral valve surgery. METHODS: 134 patients with severe MR were studied with a follow-up of 42±16months. Endpoints were Post-Operative Atrial Fibrillation (POAF), atrial and ventricular remodeling (LARR/LVRR) and correlation with outcome. POAF was defined as AF occurring within 2weeks and late AF (LAF) more than 2weeks after surgery. LARR was defined as LAVI reduction ≥15% and LVRR as any reduction of ventricular mass after surgery. RESULTS: Forty-one patients experienced POAF, 26 had LAF. Pre-operative LAVI was an independent risk factor for POAF (OR 1.03, CI [1.00-1.06], p=0.01), LAF (OR 1.03, CI [1.00-1.06], p=0.02), LARR and LVRR (OR 1.04, CI [1.01-1.07], p=0.002, respectively). LARR was found in 75 patients, while LVRR in 111. Patients with heart remodeling had less incidence of LAF and cardiac adverse events, better diastolic function and improved their NYHA class after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: LAVI should be given more weight into decision making for patients with MR as it predicts POAF and LAF and reverse atrial and ventricular remodeling, both associated to long-term outcome.

Efficacy and Safety of Paclitaxel-Coated Balloon for the Treatment of In-Stent Restenosis in High-Risk Patients.

In-stent restenosis (ISR) is a major cause of failure of percutaneous coronary intervention. The efficacy and safety of drug-coated balloon (DCB) in patients with high-risk clinical features are largely unknown. We enrolled 82 consecutive patients at high risk of bleeding with angiographically significant (diameter stenosis ≥ 50%) ISR of bare metal stent (BMS) or drug-eluting stent (DES), treated with paclitaxel-coated balloon. All patients presented at least one of the following criteria: high bleeding risk, neoplasm, chronic inflammatory disease, and need for noncardiac surgery. Dual antiplatelet therapy was indicated for 4 weeks after the procedure. At angiographic follow-up, overall late lumen loss was 0.24 ± 0.32 mm, with no significant difference between BMS-ISR and DES-ISR (0.25 ± 0.35 vs 0.22 ± 0.30 mm, p = 0.714). The Kaplan-Meier estimate for major adverse clinical events-free survival at 3 years was 81.4% (82.3% in BMS-ISR vs 79.4% in DES-ISR, log-rank p = 0.866). No stent thrombosis has been recorded. In conclusion, the use of paclitaxel-coated balloon seems to be associated with favorable outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention for BMS-ISR or DES-ISR in patients with high-risk clinical features and could be considered as a reasonable option in the presence of systemic co-morbidities and contraindications to long-term dual antiplatelet therapy.