4.6 Article

Who Has Seen Patients With ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction? First Results From Italian Real-World Coronavirus Disease 2019

期刊

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.120.017126

关键词

acute coronary syndrome; complications; coronavirus; interstitial pneumonia; percutaneous coronary intervention

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background After the coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak, social isolation measures were introduced to contain infection. Although there is currently a slowing down of the infection, a reduction of hospitalizations, especially for myocardial infarction, was observed. The aim of our study is to evaluate the impact of the infectious disease on ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) care during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, through the analysis of recent cases of patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention. Methods and Results Consecutive patients affected by STEMI from March 1 to 31, 2020, during social restrictions of Italian government, were collected and compared with patients with STEMI treated during March 2019. During March 2020, we observed a 63% reduction of patients with STEMI who were admitted to our catheterization laboratory, when compared with the same period of 2019 (13 versus 35 patients). Changes in all time components of STEMI care were notably observed, particularly for longer median time in symptom-to-first medical contact, spoke-to-hub, and the cumulative symptom-to-wire delay. Procedural data and in-hospital outcomes were similar between the 2 groups, whereas the length of hospitalization was longer in patients of 2020. In this group, we also observed higher levels of cardiac biomarkers and a worse left ventricular ejection fraction at baseline and discharge. Conclusions The coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak induced a reduction of hospital access for STEMI with an increase in treatment delay, longer hospitalization, higher levels of cardiac biomarkers, and worse left ventricular function.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据