Literature DB >> 32651656

Collateral damage of COVID-19-lockdown in Germany: decline of NSTE-ACS admissions.

A K Gitt1, A K Karcher2, R Zahn2, U Zeymer2.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32651656      PMCID: PMC7351542          DOI: 10.1007/s00392-020-01705-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol        ISSN: 1861-0684            Impact factor:   5.460


× No keyword cloud information.
Sirs: The SARS-CoV-2-Pandemic reaching Germany in March 2020 led to a nation-wide lockdown with serious restrictions on public life. Based on the experiences of the tsunami-like waves of infections in other European countries, Germany was preparing for a massive load of severe COVID-19-cases by increasing the number of intensive-care-beds and by cancelling the majority of elective medical procedures to provide as many hospital beds as possible. We conducted a retrospective review of ACS-admissions to the Heart Center Ludwigshafen, an academic tertiary heart center in Germany (using ICD-codes I20.0; I21.0, I21.1 and I21.4). We compared the period March 1st to April 21st in 2020 with the same time period in the years 2017–2019 as reference. We did the same analysis for January and February 2017–2020 to show average numbers of ACS cases over the years. During the COVID-19 lockdown in Germany in March/April 2020, we observed unchanged numbers for STEMI-admissions, but a significant 50% reduction in NSTE-ACS, in both UA and NSTEMI (Fig. 1). Similar findings were previously reported in Austria and Italy [1, 2].
Fig. 1

ACS admissions to an academic tertiary heart center before and during the shut-down for the SARS-COV-2-pandemic in Germany. Panel a: Number of treated patients with STEMI, NSTEMI and UA for the periods of January and February 2017 to 2020: Numbers are stable over 4 years. Panel b: Number of treated patients with STEMI, NSTEMI and UA for the periods of March and April (until April 21st) 2017 to 2020: Numbers of NSTEMI and UA drop by 50% in 2020. STEMI ST-elevation-myocardial-infarction, NSTEMI Non-ST-elevation-myocardial-infarction, UA unstable angina

ACS admissions to an academic tertiary heart center before and during the shut-down for the SARS-COV-2-pandemic in Germany. Panel a: Number of treated patients with STEMI, NSTEMI and UA for the periods of January and February 2017 to 2020: Numbers are stable over 4 years. Panel b: Number of treated patients with STEMI, NSTEMI and UA for the periods of March and April (until April 21st) 2017 to 2020: Numbers of NSTEMI and UA drop by 50% in 2020. STEMI ST-elevation-myocardial-infarction, NSTEMI Non-ST-elevation-myocardial-infarction, UA unstable angina We compared patient characteristics of ACS patients during the COVID-lockdown with the same time period of the year 2019 (Table 1). We did not find any relevant differences in the patient characteristics during the COVID-lockdown as compared to the year before. The current data do not provide any indication of who of the ACS population was not admitted to the hospital during the COVID-lockdown. We provide data on troponin values of all NSTEMI patients for the two time periods in 2019 and 2020 in the table. The troponin values reported are the maximal values on the first 2 days after admission for the acute event. The median troponin values during the COVID-lockdown were slightly higher as compared to the values from 2019, but significance was not reached (Table 1).
Table 1

Patient characteristics of ACS patients (STEMI, NSTEMI, UA) for the time periods March, 1 to April, 21 2019 compared to March, 1 to April, 21 2020

STEMINSTEMIUA
Time periodMar-Apr 2019Mar-Apr 2020p valueMar-Apr 2019Mar-Apr 2020p valueMar-Apr 2019Mar-Apr 2020p value
Number of admissions (n)4946n.s9550 < 0.0019448 < 0.001
 Female gender26.5% (13/49)32.6% (15/46)0.5227.4% (26/95)32.0% (16/50)0.5638.3% (36/94)43.8% (21/48)0.53
 Age (years. mean ± SD)65,9 ± 14,264,0 ± 13,80.6770,5 ± 12,371,7 ± 12,10.5868.8 ± 13.770.5 ± 10.80.58
CV risk factors
 Art. hypertension83.7% (41/49)73.9% (34/46)0.2477.9% (74/95)82.0% (41/50)0.5683.0% (78/94)83.3% (40/48)0.96
 Diabetes mellitus16.3% (8/49)34.8% (16/46) < 0.0533.7% (32/95)40.0% (20/50)0.4529.8% (28/94)20.8% (10/48)0.25
 Hyperlipidemia51.0% (25/49)65.2% (30/46)0.1661.1% (58/95)74.0% (37/50)0.1245.7% (43/94)66.7% (32/48) < 0.05
 Smoker (current)22.4% (11/49)15.2% (7/46)0.379.5% (9/95)6.0% (3/50)0.477.4% (7/94)10.4% (5/48)0.55
 Comorbidities6.1% (3/49)2.2% (1/46)0.349.5% (9/95)6.0% (3/50)0.4710.6% (10/94)12.5% (6/48)0.74
 COPD0.0% (0/49)2.2% (1/46)0.3017.9% (17/95)14.0% (7/50)0.556.4% (6/94)4.2% (2/48)0.59
 Peripheral artery disease2.0% (1/49)0.0% (0/46)0.331.1% (1/95)2.0% (1/50)0.640.0% (0/94)0.0% (0/48)n.a
 Prior stroke/TIA16.3% (8/49)13.0% (6/46)0.6542.1% (40/95)36.0% (18/50)0.4820.2% (19/94)18.8% (9/48)0.84
 Renal failure6.1% (3/49)2.2% (1/46)0.349.5% (9/95)6.0% (3/50)0.4710.6% (10/94)12.5% (6/48)0.74
 Troponin I hs (ng/l)Median with interquartile rangen.an.an.a1179,0 (294,0; 5660,0)1501,0 (530,0; 8788,0)0.27n.an.an.a

STEMI ST-elevation-myocardial-infarction, NSTEMI Non-ST-elevation-myocardial-infarction, UA unstable angina

Statistical Analysis: Continuous variables are presented as mean with standard deviation or median with interquartile range and compared with Mann–Whitney-Wilcoxon test. Categorical variables are presented as counts and percentages and compared with the Chi2-test. All tests were two-tailed and p values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Statistical analyses were performed with SAS statistical package, version 9.4 (SAS Institute)

Patient characteristics of ACS patients (STEMI, NSTEMI, UA) for the time periods March, 1 to April, 21 2019 compared to March, 1 to April, 21 2020 STEMI ST-elevation-myocardial-infarction, NSTEMI Non-ST-elevation-myocardial-infarction, UA unstable angina Statistical Analysis: Continuous variables are presented as mean with standard deviation or median with interquartile range and compared with Mann–Whitney-Wilcoxon test. Categorical variables are presented as counts and percentages and compared with the Chi2-test. All tests were two-tailed and p values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Statistical analyses were performed with SAS statistical package, version 9.4 (SAS Institute) Possible explanations for this important observation might be system-related as well as patient-related. By concentrating on the preparation for the COVID-19-pandemic with all necessary efforts undertaken to care for the isolation and treatment of suspected or confirmed cases, established integrated care systems for other acute diseases with well-defined patient pathways might have been neglected. Besides, the lockdown isolated many patients at risk for cardiovascular events and the quarantine of patients with suspected or confirmed SARS-CoV-2-infection at home sometimes might have prevented them from contacting their doctors. The acute presentation of STEMI with severe chest-pain probably still triggers the direct transportation to the cathlabs with no changes of admissions. Due to the attention to the plethora of possible symptoms of the SARS-CoV-2-infection described in the media, some patients may have mis-interpreted their NSTE-ACS symptoms such as dyspnea and chest pain as possible COVID-19-symptoms rather than as cardiovascular symptoms. As an early invasive treatment of NSTEMI-patients is associated with an improved outcome [3, 4], we might face a higher mortality by non-treated ACS patients as a collateral damage of the COVID-19-era. We, therefore, should take care about reinforcing the already established patient pathways ensuring the access to emergency cardiology care of those patients separated from the access to hospital care for COVID-19-infections that will continue to accompany us in the future until an effective vaccine is developed, to avoid undertreatment of NSTE-ACS-patients.
  13 in total

1.  Reduction in Hospital Admissions for Cardiovascular Diseases (CVDs) during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic: A Retrospective Study from a Southern Italian Region in the Year 2020.

Authors:  Fabrizio Cedrone; Giuseppe Di Martino; Pamela Di Giovanni; Emilio Greco; Edoardo Trebbi; Ferdinando Romano; Tommaso Staniscia
Journal:  Healthcare (Basel)       Date:  2022-05-09

Review 2.  The Spill-Over Impact of the Novel Coronavirus-19 Pandemic on Medical Care and Disease Outcomes in Non-communicable Diseases: A Narrative Review.

Authors:  Ivy Lynn Mak; Eric Yuk Fai Wan; Teenie Kwan Tung Wong; Wendy Woo Jung Lee; Esther Wai Yin Chan; Edmond Pui Hang Choi; Celine Sze Ling Chui; Mary Sau Man Ip; Wallace Chak Sing Lau; Kui Kai Lau; Shing Fung Lee; Ian Chi Kei Wong; Esther Yee Tak Yu; Cindy Lo Kuen Lam
Journal:  Public Health Rev       Date:  2022-04-27

3.  Global effect of COVID-19 pandemic on the rate of acute coronary syndrome admissions: a comprehensive review of published literature.

Authors:  Ayman Helal; Lamis Shahin; Mahmoud Abdelsalam; Mokhtar Ibrahim
Journal:  Open Heart       Date:  2021-06

Review 4.  [COVID-19 pandemic : Effects on clinical care of cardiovascular patients in spring 2020].

Authors:  Uwe Zeymer; Anselm Gitt; Holger Thiele
Journal:  Herz       Date:  2021-02-16       Impact factor: 1.443

5.  Frequency of five cardiovascular/hemostatic entities as primary manifestations of SARS-CoV-2 infection: Results of the UMC-19-S2.

Authors:  Òscar Miró; Pere Llorens; Sònia Jiménez; Pascual Piñera; Guillermo Burillo-Putze; Alfonso Martín; Francisco Javier Martín-Sánchez; Juan González Del Castillo
Journal:  Int J Cardiol       Date:  2021-01-30       Impact factor: 4.164

6.  The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Incidences of Atrial Fibrillation and Electrical Cardioversion at a Tertiary Care Emergency Department: An Inter- and Intra-year Analysis.

Authors:  Sebastian Schnaubelt; Hans Domanovits; Jan Niederdoeckl; Nikola Schuetz; Filippo Cacioppo; Julia Oppenauer; Alexander O Spiel; Anton N Laggner
Journal:  Front Med (Lausanne)       Date:  2020-12-04

7.  Reconsidering treatment guidelines for acute myocardial infarction during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Authors:  Jing Gao; Peng-Ju Lu; Chang-Ping Li; Hui Wang; Ji-Xiang Wang; Nan Zhang; Xiao-Wei Li; Hai-Wang Zhao; Jing Dou; Miao-Na Bai; Yu-Tian Shi; Jia Zhao; Chun Zan; Yin Liu
Journal:  BMC Cardiovasc Disord       Date:  2022-04-26       Impact factor: 2.174

8.  Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Patients Without COVID-19 With Acute Myocardial Infarction and Heart Failure.

Authors:  Daniel K Fox; R J Waken; Daniel Y Johnson; Gmerice Hammond; Jonathan Yu; Erika Fanous; Thomas M Maddox; Karen E Joynt Maddox
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2022-03-01       Impact factor: 6.106

9.  The Effect of the Lockdown on Patients With Myocardial Infarction During the COVID-19 Pandemic–A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Michael Baumhardt; Jens Dreyhaupt; Claudia Winsauer; Lina Stuhler; Kevin Thiessen; Tilman Stephan; Sinisa Markovic; Wolfgang Rottbauer; Armin Imhof; Manuel Rattka
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2021-07-02       Impact factor: 5.594

Review 10.  The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Hospital Services for Patients with Cardiac Diseases: A Scoping Review.

Authors:  Mats de Lange; Ana Sofia Carvalho; Óscar Brito Fernandes; Hester Lingsma; Niek Klazinga; Dionne Kringos
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-03-08       Impact factor: 3.390

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.