Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 11 de 11
Filter
1.
Front Cardiovasc Med ; 9: 899701, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35800174

ABSTRACT

Background and Objective: The de novo coronary lesions are the most common form of coronary artery disease, and stent implantation still is the main therapeutic strategy. This network meta-analysis aims to evaluate the efficacy of drug-coated balloons only (DCB only) and DCB combined with bare-metal stents (DCB+BMS) strategies vs. drug-eluting stents (DES) and BMS approaches in coronary artery de novo lesion. Method: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were retrieved to include the relevant randomized controlled trials that compared DCB approaches and stents implantation in patients with de novo coronary artery diseases. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiac events (MACE). The clinical outcomes included target lesion revascularization (TLR), all-cause death, and myocardial infarction. The angiographic outcomes consisted of in-segment late lumen loss (LLL) and binary restenosis. The odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) for dichotomous data, and weighted mean differences for continuous data were calculated in the Bayesian network frame. Result: A total of 26 randomized controlled trials and 4,664 patients were included in this study. The DCB-only strategy was comparable with the efficacy of MACE, clinical outcomes, and binary restenosis compared with DES. In addition, this strategy can significantly reduce the in-segment LLL compared with the first-generation (MD -0.29, -0.49 to -0.12) and the second-generation DES (MD -0.15, -0.27 to -0.026). However, subgroup analysis suggested that DCB only was associated with higher in-segment LLL than DES (MD 0.33, 0.14 to 0.51) in patients with acute coronary syndrome. Compared with DES, the DCB+BMS strategy had a similar incidence of myocardial infarction and all-cause death, but a higher incidence of MACE, TLR, and angiographic outcomes. In addition, DCB+BMS was associated with a similar incidence of myocardial infarction and all-cause death than BMS, with a lower incidence of MACE, TLR, and angiographic outcomes. Conclusion: The DCB only is associated with similar efficacy and lower risk of LLL compared with DES. In addition, the DCB+BMS strategy is superior to BMS alone but inferior to DES (PROSPERO, CRD 42021257567). Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#recordDetails.

2.
BMC Cardiovasc Disord ; 22(1): 327, 2022 07 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35870904

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Traditional angiography only displays two-dimensional images of the coronary arteries during stent implantation. However, intravascular imaging can show the structure of the vascular wall, plaque characteristics. This article aims to evaluate the efficacy of intravascular imaging-guided drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation. METHOD: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of intravascular imaging-guided, including patients with DES implantation guided by intravascular ultrasound or optical coherence tomography and traditional angiography. The databases of PubMed, EMBASE, web of science, and Cochrane Library were searched. The primary outcome was target lesion revascularization (TLR). The secondary outcomes included the target vessel revascularization (TVR), myocardial infarction (MI), stent thrombosis (ST), cardiac death, all-cause death, and the major adverse cardiac events (MACE) during the 6-24 months follow-up. The fixed-effects model was used to calculate the relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval of the outcome event. Meanwhile, the trial sequence analysis was employed to evaluate the results. RESULT: This meta-analysis included fourteen randomized controlled trials with 7307 patients. Compared with angiography-guided, intravascular imaging-guided DES implantation can significantly reduce the risk of TLR (RR 0.63, 0.49-0.82, P = 0.0004), TVR (RR 0.66, 0.52-0.85, P = 0.001), cardiac death (RR 0.58; 0.38-0.89; P = 0.01), MACE (RR 0.67, 0.57-0.79; P < 0.00001) and ST (RR 0.43, 0.24-0.78; P = 0.005). While there was no significant difference regarding MI (RR 0.77, 0.57-1.05, P = 0.10) and all-cause death (RR 0.87, 0.58-1.30, P = 0.50). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with angiography, intravascular imaging-guided DES implantation is associated with better clinical outcomes in patients with coronary artery disease, especially complex lesions (Registered by PROSPERO, CRD 42021289205).


Subject(s)
Coronary Artery Disease , Drug-Eluting Stents , Myocardial Infarction , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , Thrombosis , Coronary Angiography/adverse effects , Coronary Artery Disease/complications , Coronary Artery Disease/diagnostic imaging , Coronary Artery Disease/therapy , Death , Drug-Eluting Stents/adverse effects , Humans , Myocardial Infarction/diagnostic imaging , Myocardial Infarction/etiology , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/adverse effects , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/methods , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Thrombosis/etiology , Treatment Outcome , Ultrasonography, Interventional/adverse effects
3.
J Interv Cardiol ; 2022: 3911414, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35685429

ABSTRACT

Objectives: This meta-analysis was to verify the short-time efficacy and safety of abciximab in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Background: Abciximab has long-term efficacy in patients with STEMI undergoing PCI, but the short-term efficacy is still controversial. Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis compared with or without abciximab in patients with STEMI undergoing PCI. The relevant randomized controlled trials were included by searching PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases and other sources. The relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of outcomes were calculated by the fixed-effects model. Results: Ten randomized controlled trials with 5008 patients met inclusion criteria. There were no significant differences in risk of all-cause death at 30-day (RR 0.79, CI 0.55-1.12, P=0.18), major bleeding (1.37, 0.93-2.03, P=0.11), and transfusion (1.23, 0.94-1.61, P=0.13) between the two groups. However, there were significant differences in risk of all-cause death at 6 months (0.57, 0.36-0.90, P=0.02), recurrent myocardial infarction (0.55, 0.33-0.92, P=0.02), repeat revascularization (0.58, 0.43-0.78, P=0.0004), final TIMI flow <3 (0.77, 0.62-0.96, P=0.02), minor bleeding (1.29, 1.02-1.63, P=0.04), and thrombocytopenia (2.04, 1.40-2.97, P=0.0002). Conclusions: The application of abciximab can lead to a lower risk of reinfarction, revascularization, and all-cause death at 6 months, but a higher risk of minor bleeding, and thrombocytopenia.


Subject(s)
Abciximab , Myocardial Infarction , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction , Abciximab/adverse effects , Abciximab/therapeutic use , Hemorrhage/chemically induced , Humans , Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/surgery , Thrombocytopenia/chemically induced , Treatment Outcome
4.
J Cardiovasc Pharmacol ; 80(2): 216-225, 2022 08 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35561287

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT: Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is essential to prevent the risk of ischemia events, but it is difficult to avoid concurrent bleeding events. East Asians are associated with a higher tendency of bleeding than Caucasians, which may affect the DAPT duration. Therefore, this network meta-analysis to explore optimum DAPT duration for East Asians. The related randomized controlled trials that compared the different DAPT duration in East Asian patients were included by searching PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library database. The outcomes included myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, all-cause death, stroke, and major bleeding. In addition, net adverse cardiac and cardiovascular events was defined as a composite outcome in this study. We calculated the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals for end point events by the fixed effects model in the Bayesian's network frame. We included a total of 12 randomized controlled trials with 30,640 patients. Compared with 12-month DAPT, 1- to 3-month DAPT is effective in myocardial infarction (OR 0.72, 0.46-1.08), stents thrombosis (OR 1.27, 0.59-2.84), all-cause death (OR 0.91, 0.65-1.28), and stroke (OR 0.89, 0.57-1.39). The 1- to 3-month DAPT was associated with a lower risk of major bleeding compared with 12-month DAPT (OR 0.55, 0.4-0.76), 6-month DAPT (OR 0.54, 0.31-0.94), and >12-month DAPT (OR 0.43, 0.28-0.65). In addition, more than 12 months of DAPT did not reduce the incidence of myocardial infarction (OR 0.75, 0.51-1.11) and increased the risk of major bleeding (OR 1.28, 0.88-1.87) compared with 12-month DAPT. The 1- to 3-month DAPT was more secure and effective than the other 3 DAPT strategies. Although East Asians have a higher risk of bleeding, more than 12 months of DAPT does not increase this incidence of major bleeding.


Subject(s)
Drug-Eluting Stents , Myocardial Infarction , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , Stroke , Thrombosis , Bayes Theorem , Drug Therapy, Combination , Drug-Eluting Stents/adverse effects , Hemorrhage/chemically induced , Hemorrhage/epidemiology , Humans , Myocardial Infarction/drug therapy , Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , Myocardial Infarction/prevention & control , Network Meta-Analysis , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/adverse effects , Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors/adverse effects , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Stroke/diagnosis , Stroke/epidemiology , Stroke/prevention & control , Thrombosis/epidemiology , Thrombosis/prevention & control , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
5.
J Cardiovasc Pharmacol ; 80(1): 1-12, 2022 07 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35512058

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT: The purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) plus antithrombotic strategy in patients with coronary artery diseases compared with antithrombotic strategy alone. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Chinese Biomedical Medical Literature databases to retrieve randomized controlled trials investigating PPIs combined with antithrombotic strategy in coronary artery diseases. The primary efficacy outcome was major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE). The primary safety outcome was gastrointestinal events. Secondary outcomes included all-cause death, cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, significant bleeding from gastroduodenal lesions, and gastroduodenal ulcer. Overall, 43,943 patients were enrolled from 19 trials. The incidence of MACCE [relative risk (RR) 1.05; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.96-1.15], all-cause death (RR 0.84; 95% CI 0.69-1.01), cardiovascular death (RR 0.88; 95% CI 0.69-1.12), myocardial infarction (RR 0.98; 95% CI 0.88-1.09), stent thrombosis (RR 1.01; 95% CI 0.76-1.34), and gastroduodenal ulcer (RR 0.40; 95% CI 0.13-1.29) did not increase significantly in patients receiving PPIs compared with patients without those. There were significant differences in the risk of gastrointestinal events (RR 0.34; 95% CI 0.21-0.54) and significant bleeding from gastroduodenal lesions (RR 0.09; 95% CI 0.03-0.28) between the 2 groups. In patients with coronary artery diseases, PPIs plus antithrombotic strategy could reduce the risk of gastrointestinal events and significant bleeding from gastroduodenal lesions but may not affect the incidence of MACCE, all-cause death, cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, and gastroduodenal ulcer (PROSPERO: CRD42021277899, date of registration October 10, 2021).


Subject(s)
Coronary Artery Disease , Myocardial Infarction , Peptic Ulcer , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , Thrombosis , Anticoagulants/adverse effects , Coronary Artery Disease/drug therapy , Fibrinolytic Agents/adverse effects , Hemorrhage/chemically induced , Humans , Myocardial Infarction/drug therapy , Peptic Ulcer/chemically induced , Peptic Ulcer/diagnosis , Peptic Ulcer/drug therapy , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/adverse effects , Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors/adverse effects , Proton Pump Inhibitors/adverse effects , Thrombosis/chemically induced , Treatment Outcome
6.
J Cardiovasc Pharmacol ; 80(2): 226-235, 2022 08 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35416803

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT: Considering that there is no definite conclusion on the efficacy and safety of switching from potent P2Y 12 inhibitors to clopidogrel, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention and compared the efficacy and safety of de-escalation or not of antiplatelet therapy. The relevant randomized controlled trials were included by searching several databases. Net adverse clinical events were identified as the composite end point, which was defined as a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, revascularization, stroke, and bleeding at 12 months after acute coronary syndromes. The efficacy end points were cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, revascularization, stroke, all-cause death, and stent thrombosis. Bleeding was designed as the safety end point. The risk ratio and 95% confidence intervals of end point events were calculated by the fixed-effects model. Six randomized controlled trials with 7627 patients met inclusion criteria. There were significant differences in the risk of net adverse clinical events (RR, 0.67, CI, 0.58-0.78, P < 0.00001) and bleeding end point (0.61, 0.52-0.71, P < 0.00001) between the 2 groups. However, there were no significant differences in the risk of all efficacy end points. In general, the strategy of de-escalation from prasugrel or ticagrelor to clopidogrel can reduce the incidence of net adverse clinical events and bleeding events in patients with ACS undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.


Subject(s)
Acute Coronary Syndrome , Myocardial Infarction , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , Stroke , Acute Coronary Syndrome/diagnosis , Acute Coronary Syndrome/therapy , Clopidogrel/adverse effects , Hemorrhage/chemically induced , Hemorrhage/epidemiology , Humans , Myocardial Infarction/drug therapy , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/adverse effects , Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors/adverse effects , Prasugrel Hydrochloride/adverse effects , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Stroke/etiology , Treatment Outcome
7.
BMC Cardiovasc Disord ; 22(1): 84, 2022 03 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35246052

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The inflammation hypothesis of atherosclerosis has been put forward for more than 20 years. Although many animal experiments have suggested that anti-inflammatory therapy can inhibit the atherosclerotic process, the efficacy of anti-inflammatory therapy for patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) is still controversial. Therefore, this study aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of anti-inflammatory drugs in patients with CAD. METHOD: We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials by searching PubMed, EMBASE, web of science, and Cochrane Library database. The primary outcome was a composite outcome of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke. The secondary outcomes included individual MI, coronary revascularization, cardiovascular death, all-cause death, and stroke. The relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for outcome events were calculated by the fixed effects model, and trial sequential analysis was applied to assess the results. RESULT: A total of ten randomized controlled trials and 60,782 patients with CAD was included. Compared with patients receiving placebo, anti-inflammatory therapy significantly reduced the incidence of the primary outcome in patients with CAD (RR 0.93, 0.89-0.98, P = 0.007). In addition, the anti-inflammatory therapy can also reduce the risk of MI (RR 0.90, 0.84-0.96, P = 0.002) and coronary revascularization (RR 0.74, 0.66-0.84, P < 0.00001) remarkably. However, there was no significant difference in the incidence of cardiovascular death (RR 0.94, 0.86-1.02, P = 0.14), all-cause death (RR 1.00, 0.94-1.07, P = 0.98) and stroke (RR 0.96, 0.85-1.09, P = 0.51) between two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Anti-inflammatory therapy can reduce the incidence of the primary outcome in patients with CAD, especially the risk of MI and coronary revascularization. However, anti-inflammatory therapy increases the risk of infection. (Registered by PROSPERO, CRD 420212291032).


Subject(s)
Coronary Artery Disease , Myocardial Infarction , Stroke , Anti-Inflammatory Agents/adverse effects , Coronary Artery Disease/drug therapy , Humans , Myocardial Infarction/drug therapy , Myocardial Infarction/prevention & control , Stroke/epidemiology , Treatment Outcome
8.
J Cardiovasc Pharmacol ; 79(5): 632-640, 2022 05 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35091511

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT: The risk of bleeding is high in East Asians, whether East Asian patients with acute coronary syndrome choose ticagrelor or clopidogrel is still controversial. In this study, PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library database, and other sources were systematically searched. The primary efficacy outcome was all-cause death, the primary safety outcomes were any bleeding, PLATO major bleeding, and fatal bleeding. The secondary outcomes included vascular-cause death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, stroke, and dyspnea. A total of 8 randomized controlled trials with 3597 patients met inclusion criteria. Compared with clopidogrel, ticagrelor had significantly higher incidence of any bleeding [risk ratio (RR), 1.63; 1.33-1.99; P < 0.00001], PLATO major bleeding (RR 1.56; 1.15-2.12; P = 0.004), and dyspnea (RR 2.60; 1.68-4.00; P < 0.00001). However, ticagrelor was associated with a significantly reduced risk of stent thrombosis (RR 0.42; 0.19-0.92; P = 0.03). There was no significant difference in the risk of all-cause death (RR 0.87; 0.64-1.24; P = 0.44), fatal bleeding (RR 2.49; 0.79-7.86; P = 0.12), vascular-cause death (RR 0.88; 1.60-0.30; P = 0.52), myocardial infarction (RR 0.89; 0.65-1.23; P = 0.49), and stroke (RR 0.84; 0.47-1.50; P = 0.56) between the 2 groups. The present findings demonstrated that ticagrelor was associated with a higher risk of any bleeding, PLATO major bleeding, and dyspnea compared with clopidogrel in East Asian patients with acute coronary syndrome. However, it significantly reduced the risk of stent thrombosis. (Registered by PROSPERO, CRD42021255215).


Subject(s)
Acute Coronary Syndrome , Myocardial Infarction , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , Stroke , Thrombosis , Acute Coronary Syndrome/diagnosis , Acute Coronary Syndrome/drug therapy , Asian People , Clopidogrel/adverse effects , Dyspnea/diagnosis , Dyspnea/drug therapy , Dyspnea/epidemiology , Hemorrhage/chemically induced , Hemorrhage/drug therapy , Humans , Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , Myocardial Infarction/drug therapy , Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/adverse effects , Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors/adverse effects , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Stroke/diagnosis , Stroke/epidemiology , Stroke/prevention & control , Thrombosis/drug therapy , Ticagrelor/adverse effects , Treatment Outcome
9.
J Cardiovasc Pharmacol ; 79(3): 264-272, 2021 11 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34813573

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT: The optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) for patients implanted with new-generation drug-eluting stents in East Asians is currently still controversial. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to investigate the efficacy and safety of short-term DAPT in patients with those. In this study, randomized controlled trials from PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched to compare the efficacy and safety of short-term DAPT (6 months or less) with long-term DAPT (12 months or more) in patients implanted with new-generation drug-eluting stents in East Asian from inception to September 2020. The primary efficacy outcome was all-cause death, the primary safety outcome was major bleeding, and the secondary outcomes included cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, definite or possible stent thrombosis, and stroke. A total of 6 randomized controlled trials with 15,688 patients met inclusion criteria; there were no significant differences in the incidence of all-cause death [risk ratio (RR), 1.03; 0.76-1.39; P = 0.856)], cardiovascular death (RR, 0.83; 0.55-1.24; P = 0.361), myocardial infarction (RR, 0.97; 0.72-1.31; P = 0.853), definite or possible stent thrombosis (RR, 1.52; 0.83-2.78; P = 0.170), and stroke (RR, 0.90; 0.61-1.31; P = 0.574) between short-term and long-term DAPTs. However, there was a significant difference in the risk of major bleeding (RR, 0.64; 0.49-0.85; P = 0.002) between the 2 groups. Compared with long-term DAPT, the short-term DAPT can reduce the risk of major bleeding without increasing the risk of death or ischemia for East Asians (Registered by PROSPERO, CRD42020213266).


Subject(s)
Myocardial Infarction , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , Stroke , Thrombosis , Asian People , Drug Therapy, Combination , Hemorrhage/chemically induced , Hemorrhage/drug therapy , Humans , Myocardial Infarction/drug therapy , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/adverse effects , Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors/adverse effects , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Stroke/diagnosis , Stroke/prevention & control , Thrombosis/drug therapy , Thrombosis/prevention & control , Treatment Outcome
10.
Front Cardiovasc Med ; 8: 660360, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34557526

ABSTRACT

Background and Objective: Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is the basis for preventing ischemic events after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and DAPT for 12 months has been the standard strategy recommended by the guidelines. However, patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) have a higher risk of thrombosis, and the application of very short-term DAPT (1-3 months) in patients with ACS is consistently controversial. The purpose of this study is to explore the efficacy and safety of DAPT for 1-3 months in patients with ACS who were implanted with drug-eluting stents (DES). Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that compared the very short-term (3 months or less) with long-term (12 months or more) DAPT in patients with ACS after PCI. The randomized controlled trials were included by searching PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library database. The relative risk (RR) and 95% CIs for endpoint events were calculated by the fixed effects model, and trial sequential analysis was applied to calculate the anticipated sample size and assess the results. Result: A total of eight randomized controlled trials with 16,492 patients who met the inclusion criteria were conducted. There were no significant statistic differences in myocardial infarction (RR 1.05, 0.82-1.35, P = 0.68), stents thrombosis (RR 1.32, 0.85-2.07, P = 0.22), all-cause death (RR 0.87, 0.66-1.13, P = 0.29), and target vessel revascularization (RR 0.93, 0.76-1.13, P = 0.47). However, there were significant differences in major bleeding (RR 0.60, 0.50-0.73, P < 0.00001) and the net adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (RR 0.84, 0.74-0.95, P = 0.007). Conclusions: The strategy of DAPT for 1-3 months not only has a significant effect in patients with ACS who were implanted with DES but also reduces the risk of major bleeding. The scheme of short-term DAPT followed by P2Y12 receptor inhibitor monotherapy is especially beneficial for patients with ACS. The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis are based on the application of new generation DES and new oral antiplatelet drugs in patients with ACS, which are difficult to use in the general population (Registered by PROSPERO, CRD 42020210520). Systematic Review Registration:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier: CRD 42020210520.

11.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 100(1): e24151, 2021 Jan 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33429796

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is still developing worldwide. The prognosis of the disease will become worse and mortality will be even higher when it is combined with cardiovascular disease. Furthermore, COVID-19 is highly infectious and requires strict isolation measures. For acute coronary syndromes (ACS), a common cardiovascular disease, infection may aggravate the occurrence and development of ACS, making the management of more difficult. It will be an enormous challenge for clinical practice to deal with ACS in this setting of COVID-19.Aim to reduce the mortality of ACS patients during the epidemic of COVID-19 by standardizing procedures as much as possible.Pubmed and other relevant databases were searched to retrieve articles on COVID-19 and articles on ACS management strategies during previous influenza epidemics. The data was described and synthesized to summarize the diagnosis and management strategy of ACS, the preparation of catheter laboratory, and the protection of the medical staff in the context of COVID-19. Ethical approval is not required in this study, because it is a review with no recourse to patient identifiable information.Standardized diagnosis and treatment advice can help reduce the mortality of COVID-19 patients with ACS. In the absence of contraindications, the third generation of thrombolytic drugs should be the first choice for thrombolytic treatment in the isolation ward. For patients who have to receive PCI, this article provides detailed protective measures to avoid nosocomial infection.


Subject(s)
Acute Coronary Syndrome/therapy , Acute Coronary Syndrome/virology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Infection Control/standards , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Acute Coronary Syndrome/mortality , COVID-19/transmission , Humans , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...