No abstract

Aims To evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on patient admissions to Italian cardiac care units (CCUs). Methods and Results We conducted a multicentre, observational, nationwide survey to collect data on admissions for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) at Italian CCUs throughout a 1 week period during the COVID-19 outbreak, compared with the equivalent week in 2019. We observed a 48.4% reduction in admissions for AMI compared with the equivalent week in 2019 (P < 0.001). The reduction was significant for both ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction [STEMI; 26.5%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 21.7–32.3; P = 0.009] and non-STEMI (NSTEMI; 65.1%, 95% CI 60.3–70.3; P < 0.001). Among STEMIs, the reduction was higher for women (41.2%; P = 0.011) than men (17.8%; P = 0.191). A similar reduction in AMI admissions was registered in North Italy (52.1%), Central Italy (59.3%), and South Italy (52.1%). The STEMI case fatality rate during the pandemic was substantially increased compared with 2019 [risk ratio (RR) = 3.3, 95% CI 1.7–6.6; P < 0.001]. A parallel increase in complications was also registered (RR = 1.8, 95% CI 1.1–2.8; P = 0.009). Conclusion Admissions for AMI were significantly reduced during the COVID-19 pandemic across Italy, with a parallel increase in fatality and complication rates. This constitutes a serious social issue, demanding attention by the scientific and healthcare communities and public regulatory agencies.

BACKGROUNDConflicting evidence exists on the efficacy and safety of bivalirudin administered as part of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with an acute coronary syndrome. METHODSWe randomly assigned 7213 patients with an acute coronary syndrome for whom PCI was anticipated to receive either bivalirudin or unfractionated heparin. Patients in the bivalirudin group were subsequently randomly assigned to receive or not to receive a post-PCI bivalirudin infusion. Primary outcomes for the comparison between bivalirudin and heparin were the occurrence of major adverse cardiovascular events (a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) and net adverse clinical events (a composite of major bleeding or a major adverse cardiovascular event). The primary outcome for the comparison of a post-PCI bivalirudin infusion with no post-PCI infusion was a composite of urgent target-vessel revascularization, definite stent thrombosis, or net adverse clinical events. RESULTSThe rate of major adverse cardiovascular events was not significantly lower with bivalirudin than with heparin (10.3% and 10.9%, respectively; relative risk, 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81 to 1.09; P = 0.44), nor was the rate of net adverse clinical events (11.2% and 12.4%, respectively; relative risk, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.03; P = 0.12). Post-PCI bivalirudin infusion, as compared with no infusion, did not significantly decrease the rate of urgent target-vessel revascularization, definite stent thrombosis, or net adverse clinical events (11.0% and 11.9%, respectively; relative risk, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.11; P = 0.34). CONCLUSIONSIn patients with an acute coronary syndrome, the rates of major adverse cardiovascular events and net adverse clinical events were not significantly lower with bivalirudin than with unfractionated heparin. The rate of the composite of urgent target-vessel revascularization, definite stent thrombosis, or net adverse clinical events was not significantly lower with a post-PCI bivalirudin infusion than with no post-PCI infusion. (Funded by the Medicines Company and Terumo Medical; MATRIX ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01433627.)

Atherosclerosis represents the most common pathological substrate of coronary heart disease (CHD), and the characterization of the disease as a chronic low-grade inflammatory condition is now largely accepted. A number of mediators of inflammation have been widely studied, both as surrogate biomarkers and as causal agents, in the pathophysiological network of atherogenesis and plaque vulnerability. The epidemiological observation that biomarkers of inflammation are associated with clinical cardiovascular risk supports the theory that targeted anti-inflammatory treatment appears to be a promising strategy in reducing residual cardiovascular risk on the background of traditional medical therapy. A large number of randomized controlled trials have shown that drugs commonly used in cardiovascular disease (CVD), such as statins, may be effective in the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular events through an anti-inflammatory effect. Moreover, several anti-inflammatory drugs are being tested for their potential to reduce residual cardiovascular risk on the background of validated medical therapy for atherosclerotic disease. In this paper, we review relevant evidence with regard to the relationship between inflammation and CVD, from pathogenesis to therapeutic strategies.