Precautions and Procedures for Coronary and Structural Cardiac Interventions During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Guidance from Canadian Association of Interventional Cardiology

Deferral of non-emergency cardiac interventions is associated with increased emergency hospitalizations up to 24 months post-procedure

BACKGROUND

Patients, whose non-emergency cardiac procedure was postponed during the COVID-19 pandemic, have shown signs of disease progression in the short term. Data on the long-term effects are currently lacking.

AIM

To assess outcomes through 3 years following deferral.

METHODS

This retrospective, single-center analysis includes consecutive patients whose non-emergency cardiovascular intervention was postponed during the first COVID-19-related lockdown (March 19 to April 30, 2020). Outcomes over 36 months post-procedure were analyzed and compared to a seasonal control group undergoing non-emergency intervention in 2019 as scheduled (n = 214). The primary endpoint was a composite of emergency cardiovascular hospitalization and death. Additionally, NT-proBNP levels were analyzed.

RESULTS

The combined endpoint occurred in 60 of 178 patients (33.7%) whose non-emergency transcatheter heart valve intervention, rhythmological procedure, or left heart catheterization was postponed. Primary endpoint events did not occur more frequently in the study group during the 36-month follow-up (p = 0.402), but within the first 24 months post-procedure (HR 1.77, 95% CI 1.20-2.60, p = 0.003). Deferred patients affected by an event in the postprocedural 24 months had significantly higher NT-proBNP levels at the time of intervention (p < 0.001) (AUC 0.768, p = 0.003, optimum cut-off 808.5 pg/ml, sensitivity 84.2%, specificity 65.8%) and thereafter (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Deferral of non-emergency cardiovascular interventions is associated with poor outcomes up to 24 months post-procedure. Adverse effects affect patients who develop signs of acute heart failure, as indicated by NT-proBNP, prior to treatment. These findings could help improve resource allocation in times of limited capacity.

Excess deaths directly and indirectly attributable to COVID-19 using routinely reported mortality data, Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan, 2020: a cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVES

Studies on excess deaths (ED) show that reported deaths from COVID-19 underestimate death. To understand mortality for improved pandemic preparedness, we estimated ED directly and indirectly attributable to COVID-19 and ED by age groups.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study using routinely reported individual deaths data.

SETTINGS

The 21 health facilities in Bishkek that register all city deaths.

PARTICIPANTS

Residents of Bishkek who died in the city from 2015 to 2020.

OUTCOME MEASURE

We report weekly and cumulative ED by age, sex and causes of death for 2020. EDs are the difference between observed and expected deaths. Expected deaths were calculated using the historical average and the upper bound of the 95% CI from 2015 to 2019. We calculated the percentage of deaths above expected using the upper bound of the 95% CI of expected deaths. COVID-19 deaths were laboratory confirmed (U07.1) or probable (U07.2 or unspecified pneumonia).

RESULTS

Of 4660 deaths in 2020, we estimated 840-1042 ED (79-98 ED per 100 000 people). Deaths were 22% greater than expected. EDs were greater for men (28%) than for women (20%). EDs were observed in all age groups, with the highest ED (43%) among people 65-74 years of age. Hospital deaths were 45% higher than expected. During peak mortality (1 July -21 July), weekly ED was 267% above expected, and ED by disease-specific cause of death were above expected: 193% for ischaemic heart diseases, 52% for cerebrovascular diseases and 421% for lower respiratory diseases. COVID-19 was directly attributable to 69% of ED.

CONCLUSION

Deaths directly and indirectly associated with the COVID-19 pandemic were markedly higher than reported, especially for older populations, in hospital settings, and during peak weeks of SARS-CoV-2 transmission. These ED estimates can support efforts to prioritise support for persons at greatest risk of dying during surges.

Predictors of worse outcome after postponing non-emergency cardiac interventions during the COVID-19 pandemic

OBJECTIVE

Deferral of non-emergency cardiac procedures is associated with increased early emergency cardiovascular hospitalisation. This study aimed to identify predictors of worse clinical outcome after deferral of non-emergency cardiovascular interventions.

METHODS

This observational case-control study included consecutive patients whose non-emergency cardiac intervention has been postponed during COVID-19-related lockdown between 19 March and 30 April 2020 (n=193). Cox regression was performed to identify predictors of the combined 1-year end point emergency cardiovascular hospitalisation and death. All patients undergoing non-emergency interventions in the corresponding time period 2019 served as control group (n=216).

RESULTS

The combined end point of death and emergency cardiovascular hospitalisation occurred in 70 (36.3%) of 193 patients with a postponed cardiovascular intervention. The planned intervention was deferred by a median of 23 (19-36) days. Arterial hypertension (HR 2.27; 95% CI 1.00 to 5.12; p=0.049), chronic kidney disease (HR 1.89; 95% CI 1.03 to 3.49; p=0.041) as well as severe valvular heart disease (HR 3.08; 95% CI 1.68 to 5.64; p<0.001) were independent predictors of death or emergency hospitalisation. Kaplan-Maier estimators of the combined end point were 31% in patients with arterial hypertension, 56% in patients with severe valvular heart disease and 77% with both risk factors (HR 12.4, 95% CI 3.8 to 40.7; p<0.001) and only 9% in patients without these risk factors (log rank p<0.001). N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) cut-point of ≥1109 pg/mL best predicts the occurrence of primary end point event in deferred patients (area under the curve 0.71; p<0.001; sensitivity 63.8%, specificity 69.4%).

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that patients with either arterial hypertension, chronic kidney or severe valvular heart disease are at very high risk for emergency hospitalisation and increased mortality in case of postponed cardiac interventions even in supposed stable clinical status. Risk seems to be even higher in patients suffering from a combination of these conditions. If the ongoing or future pandemics force hospitals again to postpone cardiac interventions, the biomarker NT-proBNP is an applicable parameter for outpatient monitoring to identify those at risk for adverse cardiovascular events.

Cardiovascular disease and COVID-19, a deadly combination: A review about direct and indirect impact of a pandemic

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is known to present with respiratory symptoms, which can lead to severe pneumonia and respiratory failure. However, it can have multisystem complications such as cardiovascular manifestations. The cardiovascular manifestations reported comprise myocarditis, cardiogenic shock, arrhythmias, pulmonary embolism, deep vein embolism, acute heart failure, and myocardial infarction. There is also an indirect impact of the pandemic on the management of cardiovascular care that has been shown clearly in multiple publications. In this review, we summarize the deadly relation of COVID-19 with cardiovascular events and the wider impact on several cardiovascular care areas by the pandemic situation

Care and Outcomes of ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Across Multiple COVID-19 Waves

BACKGROUND

There are concerns of delays in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) care during the COVID-19 pandemic. It is unclear whether the care and outcomes of STEMI patients differ between COVID-19 waves and compared with historical periods.

METHODS

Consecutive patients in the Vancouver Coastal Health Authority STEMI database were included to compare care during 3 distinct waves of the COVID-19 pandemic (9 months; March 2020 to January 2021) with an historical non-COVID-19 cohort. We compared STEMI incidence, baseline characteristics, and outcomes between groups. We also examined time from first medical contact (FMC) to reperfusion, symptom to FMC, and FMC to STEMI diagnosis, as well as predictors of delays.

RESULTS

The incidence of STEMI was similar during COVID-19 (n = 305; mean 0.93/day) and before COVID-19 (n = 949; 0.97/day; P = 0.80). The COVID-19 cohort showed significant delay in FMC-to-reperfusion (median 116 min vs 102 min; P < 0.001) and FMC-to-STEMI diagnosis (median 17 mins vs 11 min; P < 0.001). Delays in FMC-to-device times worsened across the 3 COVID-19 waves (FMC-to-device time ≤ 90 min in wave 1: 32.9%; in wave 2: 25.6%; in wave 3: 16.3%; P = 0.045 [47.5% before COVID-19; P < 0.001]). There were no significant predictors of delay were unique to the COVID-19 cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates delays in reperfusion during the COVID-19 pandemic compared with the historical control, with delays increasing during subsequent waves within the pandemic. It is critical to further understand these care gaps to improve STEMI care for future waves of the current and future pandemics.

Deferral of non-emergency cardiac procedures is associated with increased early emergency cardiovascular hospitalizations

Background

During the COVID-19 pandemic, in anticipation of a demand surge for high-care hospital beds, many hospitals postponed non-emergency interventions of cardiac patients.

Aim

The aim of this study was to assess the outcomes of cardiac patients whose non-emergency interventions had been deferred during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

Patients whose non-emergency cardiac intervention had been cancelled between March 19th and April 30th, 2020 were included (study group). All patients were considered as deferrable according to current recommendations. Patients’ outcomes after 12 months were compared to a seasonal control group who underwent non-emergency interventions in 2019 as scheduled. The primary endpoint was a composite of emergency cardiovascular hospitalization and death. Secondary endpoints were levels of symptoms and cardiac biomarkers.

Results

Outcomes of 193 consecutive patients in the study group were assessed and compared to 216 controls. The primary endpoint occurred significantly more often in the study group (HR 2.42, 95%CI 1.63–3.61, p < 0.001). This was driven by an increase in hospitalizations. Subgroup analyses showed that especially patients with a deferred transcatheter heart valve intervention experienced early emergency hospitalization (HR 9.55, 95%CI 3.70–24.62, p < 0.001). These findings were accompanied by more pronounced symptoms and higher biomarker levels.

Conclusions

Deferral of non-emergency cardiac interventions to meet the higher demand for hospital beds during the COVID-19 crisis is associated with early emergency cardiovascular hospitalizations. Patients suffering from valvular heart disease especially constitute a vulnerable group. Consequently, our results suggest that current recommendations on the management of cardiovascular disease during the COVID-19 pandemic need revision.

Graphical abstract

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00392-022-02032-z.

Same-Day Discharge Post-Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement During the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Multicenter PROTECT TAVR Study

Objectives

The aim of this study was to determine the safety and efficacy of same-day discharge (SDD) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic has placed significant stress on health care systems worldwide. SDD in highly selected TAVR patients can facilitate the provision of essential cardiovascular care while managing competing COVID-19 resource demands.

Methods

Patient selection for SDD was at the discretion of the local multidisciplinary heart team, across 7 international sites. The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, stroke, myocardial infarction, all-cause readmission, major vascular complications, and new permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation.

Results

From March 2020 to August 2021, 124 of 2,100 patients who underwent elective transfemoral TAVR were selected for SDD. The average age was 78.9 ± 7.8 years, the median Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 2.4 (IQR: 1.4-4.2), and 32.3% (n = 40) had preexisting PPMs. There were no major vascular complications, strokes, or deaths during the index admission. One patient (0.8%) required PPM implantation for complete heart block and was discharged the same day. No patient required a PPM between discharge home and 30-day follow-up. The composite of cardiovascular death, stroke, myocardial infarction, all-cause readmission, major vascular complications, and new PPM at 30 days occurred in 5.7% patients (n = 6 of 106).

Conclusions

SDD post-TAVR is safe and feasible in selected patients at low risk for adverse clinical events postdischarge. This strategy may have a potential role in highly selected patients even when the COVID-19 pandemic abates.

Comparison of the Characteristics, Management, and Outcomes of STEMI Patients Presenting With vs. Those of Patients Presenting Without COVID-19 Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objectives

This study aimed to investigate the differences in the characteristics, management, and clinical outcomes of patients with and that of those without coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection who had ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).

Methods

Databases including Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase were searched up to July 2021. Observational studies that reported on the characteristics, management, or clinical outcomes and those published as full-text articles were included. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the quality of all included studies.

Results

A total of 27,742 patients from 13 studies were included in this meta-analysis. Significant delay in symptom onset to first medical contact (SO-to-FMC) time (mean difference = 23.42 min; 95% CI: 5.85–40.99 min; p = 0.009) and door-to-balloon (D2B) time (mean difference = 12.27 min; 95% CI: 5.77–18.78 min; p = 0.0002) was observed in COVID-19 patients. Compared to COVID-19 negative patients, those who are positive patients had significantly higher levels of C-reactive protein, D-dimer, and thrombus grade (p < 0.05) and showed more frequent use of thrombus aspiration and glycoprotein IIbIIIa (Gp2b3a) inhibitor (p < 0.05). COVID-19 positive patients also had higher rates of in-hospital mortality (OR = 5.98, 95% CI: 4.78–7.48, p < 0.0001), cardiogenic shock (OR = 2.75, 95% CI: 2.02–3.76, p < 0.0001), and stent thrombosis (OR = 5.65, 95% CI: 2.41–13.23, p < 0.0001). They were also more likely to be admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) (OR = 4.26, 95% CI: 2.51–7.22, p < 0.0001) and had a longer length of stay (mean difference = 4.63 days; 95% CI: 2.56–6.69 days; p < 0.0001).

Conclusions

This study revealed that COVID-19 infection had an impact on the time of initial medical intervention for patients with STEMI after symptom onset and showed that COVID-19 patients with STEMI were more likely to have thrombosis and had poorer outcomes.

MitraClip for mitral valve regurgitation and transcatheter aortic valve implantation for severe aortic valve stenosis: state-of-the-art

There is a worldwide expansion in percutaneous therapy for valvular heart disease. Rapidly evolving technology and the general increase in life expectancy will support the evolution of new treatment options dedicated to structural heart interventions. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation for severe aortic valve stenosis and percutaneous mitral valve repair with the MitraClip system for severe mitral regurgitation have been demonstrated as a feasible, innovative alternative for surgical treatment. Despite the inequality in clinical experience, both procedures have encouraging results and now are a part of everyday clinical practice. More importantly, rapid development is expected in the next decades. However, the global coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic imposed redistribution of healthcare resources. Hospitals were obliged to modify their workflow and limit TAVI and MitraClip procedures to urgent or in highly symptomatic patients. Despite this encumbrance improvement in technology and experience supported by robust evidence from current studies might extend indications for both procedures. The future holds promise for this treatment modality to become the preferred procedure for all patients despite age or risk and reserving surgical treatment for a minority. Thus, we present state-of-the-art and current evidence for both methods assumed to change the paradigm of treatment of valvular heart failure in the future.

Structural Heart Interventions During COVID-19

The spread of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic across the globe and the United States presented unprecedented challenges with dawn of new policies to reserve resources and protect the public. One of the major policies adopted by hospitals across the nations were postponement of non-emergent procedures such as transaortic valve replacement (TAVR), left atrial appendage closure device (LAAC), MitraClip and CardioMEMS. Guidelines were based mainly on the avoidable clinical outcomes occurring during COVID-19 era. As our understanding of the SARS-CoV-2 evolved, advanced cardiac procedures may safely continue through careful advanced coordination. We aim to highlight the new guidelines published by different major cardiovascular societies, and discuss solutions to safely perform procedures to improve outcomes in a patient population with high acuity of illness during the COVID-19 pandemic era.

Outcomes of COVID-19-positive acute coronary syndrome patients: A multisource electronic healthcare records study from England

BACKGROUND

Patients with underlying cardiovascular disease and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection are at increased risk of morbidity and mortality.

OBJECTIVES

This study was designed to characterize the presenting profile and outcomes of patients hospitalized with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and COVID-19 infection.

METHODS

This observational cohort study was conducted using multisource data from all acute NHS hospitals in England. All consecutive patients hospitalized with diagnosis of ACS with or without COVID-19 infection between 1 March and 31 May 2020 were included. The primary outcome was in-hospital and 30-day mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 12 958 patients were hospitalized with ACS during the study period, of which 517 (4.0%) were COVID-19-positive and were more likely to present with non-ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction. The COVID-19 ACS group were generally older, Black Asian and Minority ethnicity, more comorbid and had unfavourable presenting clinical characteristics such as elevated cardiac troponin, pulmonary oedema, cardiogenic shock and poor left ventricular systolic function compared with the non-COVID-19 ACS group. They were less likely to receive an invasive coronary angiography (67.7% vs 81.0%), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (30.2% vs 53.9%) and dual antiplatelet medication (76.3% vs 88.0%). After adjusting for all the baseline differences, patients with COVID-19 ACS had higher in-hospital (adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 3.27; 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.41-4.42) and 30-day mortality (aOR: 6.53; 95% CI: 5.1-8.36) compared to patients with the non-COVID-19 ACS.

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 infection was present in 4% of patients hospitalized with an ACS in England and is associated with lower rates of guideline-recommended treatment and significant mortality hazard.

Same Day Discharge during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Highly Selected Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Patients

Background

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with a standardized clinical pathway allows most patients to achieve safe next-day discharge. This approach has been successfully implemented across global centers as part of the Benchmark Program. Considering restricted hospital resources resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic, a modified same day discharge (SDD) clinical pathway was implemented for selected TAVR patients at a single Benchmark site.

Methods

All patients accepted for TAVR were assessed for the SDD clinical pathway. Eligibility criteria included adequate social support and accessibility to the TAVR program post-discharge. Patients with preexisting conduction disease were excluded. The clinical pathway comprised of mobilization, bloodwork and electrocardiogram 4 hours post-TAVR and discharge ≥8 hours following groin hemostasis.

Results

From June to December 2020, 142 patients underwent TAVR at a single community Benchmark site. Of those, 29 highly selected patients were successfully discharged the same day using the SDD clinical pathway. There were no vascular access complications, permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation, or mortality in the SDD group during index admission or at 30-day follow-up. When compared to a standard therapy group, there was no statistically significant difference in 30-day cardiovascular readmission.

Conclusions

This study demonstrates the safety and feasibility of same day discharge post-TAVR in a highly selected cohort of patients, with no observable difference in safety outcomes when compared to patients who were discharged according to standard institutional practice.Abbreviations: AS: aortic stenosis; ACT: Activated clotting time; AV: atrioventricular; AVB: atrioventricular block; BBB: bundle branch block; CAIC: Canadian Society for Cardiovascular Angiography; CCL: cardiac catheterization laboratory; CT: Computed topography; CV: cardiovascular; IQR: Interquartile Range; IVCD: intraventricular conduction delay; LBBB: left bundle branch block; LOS: length of stay; NDD: next day discharge; PPM: permanent pacemaker; RBBB: right bundle branch block; SCAI: Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Intervention; SD: standard deviation; SDD: same day discharge; ST: standard therapy; STS PROM: society of thoracic surgeons predicted risk of mortality; TAVR: transcatheter aortic valve replacement; TF: transfemoral; THV: transcatheter heart valve; TTE: transthoracic echocardiogram; VARC: Valve Academic Research Consortium

Patient response, treatments, and mortality for acute myocardial infarction during the COVID-19 pandemic

Aim

COVID-19 might have affected the care and outcomes of hospitalised acute myocardial infarction (AMI). We aimed to determine whether the COVID-19 pandemic changed patient response, hospital treatment and mortality from AMI.

Methods and Results

Admission were classified as non ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) or STEMI at 99 hospitals in England through live feeding from the Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project between 1^st January, 2019 and 22^nd May, 2020. Time series plots were estimated using a 7-day simple moving average, adjusted for seasonality. From 23^rd March, 2020 (UK lockdown) median daily hospitalisations decreased more for NSTEMI (69 to 35; IRR 0.51, 95% CI 0.47-0.54) than STEMI (35 to 25; IRR 0.74, 95% CI 0.69-0.80) to a nadir on 19th April, 2020. During lockdown, patients were younger (mean age 68.7 years vs. 66.9 years), less frequently diabetic (24.6% vs. 28.1%) or had cerebrovascular disease (7.0% vs. 8.6%). STEMI more frequently received primary PCI (81.8% vs 78.8%%), thrombolysis was negligible (0.5% vs. 0.3%), median admission-to-coronary angiography duration for NSTEMI decreased (26.2 vs. 64.0 hours), median duration of hospitalisation decreased (4 to 2 days), secondary prevention pharmacotherapy prescription remained unchanged (each >94.7%). Mortality at 30 days increased for NSTEMI (from 5.4% to 7.5%; OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.08-1.80), but decreased for STEMI (from 10.2% to 7.7%; OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.54-0.97).

Conclusions

During COVID-19, there was a substantial decline in admissions with AMI. Those who presented to hospital were younger, less co-morbid and, for NSTEMI, had higher 30-day mortality.

Influence of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic on Patients with ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction in Taiwan

The outbreak of the new coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has notably affected the medical system worldwide and influenced the health-seeking behavior of people while depleting medical resources, causing a delay in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) management. In this single-center, retrospective cohort study, we compared the clinical pictures of nontransfer patients who presented to the emergency department directly and received primary percutaneous cardiovascular intervention (PPCI) from February 1 to April 30, 2020 (group 2, N = 28), with patients who received PPCI from February 1 to April 30, 2016-2019 (group 1, N = 130). A total of 158 patients with STEMI who received PPCI were included in the study. A decrease in the percentage of patients with door-to-balloon time <90 minutes was found in group 2 (64.3% vs. 81.5%, p = 0.044). The adjusted odds ratio was calculated using logistic regression, according to potential confounding factors such as age, sex, off-hours, and Killip class. An adjusted odds ratio of 2.45 (95% confidence interval, 1.1-6.0, p = 0.048) was reported for group 2. A decrease in the percentage of patients meeting the criteria of door-to-balloon time <90 minutes was demonstrated, and differences were revealed in the clinical pictures of patients with STEMI after the pandemic. While systemic factors contributed the most, improvements and adjustments in the protocols for managing patients with STEMI for better outcomes in the COVID-19 era have yet to be studied.

Case Selection During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Who Should Go to the Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory?

Purpose of review

To summarize the best available evidence and recommendations regarding case selection for cardiac catheterization laboratory (CCL) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic with emphasis on ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) management.

Recent findings

The restructuring of cardiovascular services to preserve hospital beds and personal protective equipment during the COVID-19 pandemic had a profound effect on healthcare delivery around the world with unintended consequences. In the United States, a significant 38% reduction in CCL activations for STEMI was noted in the early phase of the pandemic. Similarly, a 34% decline in utilization of invasive angiography, an 18% reduction in primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI), and a 19% increase in door-to-balloon (D2B) times were also observed. These trends coincided with a significant increase in out-of-hospital cardiac arrests and late MI presentations. A shift to pharmacological reperfusion has been advocated in Asia, which resulted in increased morbidity and mortality.

Summary

COVID-19 has negatively affected many aspects of STEMI care, including timely access to mechanical reperfusion, which has resulted in increased morbidity and mortality. Balancing optimal STEMI care with the risk of infection to healthcare workers during the pandemic is challenging. Recommendations provided by consensus documents are a helpful guidance.

Reduction in new cardiac electronic device implantations in Catalonia during COVID-19

Aims

During the COVID-19 pandemic, concern regarding its effect on the management of non-communicable diseases has been raised. However, there are no data on the impact on cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) implantation rates. We aimed to determine the impact of SARS-CoV2 on the monthly incidence rates and type of pacemaker (PM) and implantable cardiac defibrillator (ICD) implantations in Catalonia before and after the declaration of the state of alarm in Spain on 14 March 2020.

Methods and results

Data on new CIED implantations for 2017–20 were prospectively collected by nine hospitals in Catalonia. A mixed model with random intercepts corrected for time was used to estimate the change in monthly CIED implantations. Compared to the pre-COVID-19 period, an absolute decrease of 56.5% was observed (54.7% in PM and 63.7% in ICD) in CIED implantation rates. Total CIED implantations for 2017–19 and January and February 2020 was 250/month (>195 PM and >55 ICD), decreasing to 207 (161 PM and 46 ICD) in March and 131 (108 PM and 23 ICD) in April 2020. In April 2020, there was a significant fall of 185.25 CIED implantations compared to 2018 [95% confidence interval (CI) 129.6–240.9; P < 0.001] and of 188 CIED compared to 2019 (95% CI 132.3–243.7; P < 0.001). No significant differences in the type of PM or ICD were observed, nor in the indication for primary or secondary prevention.

Conclusions

During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, a substantial decrease in CIED implantations was observed in Catalonia. Our findings call for measures to avoid long-term social impact.

Best Practice Recommendations for Optimizing Care in Structural Heart Programs: Planning Efficient and Resource Leveraging Systems (PEARLS)

The COVID19 pandemic brought unprecedented disruption to healthcare. Staggering morbidity, mortality, and economic losses prompted the review and refinement of care for structural heart disease (SHD). To mitigate negative impacts in the face of crisis or capacity constraints, this paper offers best practice recommendations for Planning Efficient and Resource Leveraging Systems (PEARLS) in structural heart programs. A systematic assessment is recommended for hospital capacity, Heart Team roles and functions, and patient and procedural risks associated with increased resource utilization. Strategies, tactics, and pathways are provided for the delivery of patient-centered, efficient and resource-leveraging care from referral to follow-up. Through the optimal use of capacity and resources, paired with dynamic triage, forecasting, and surveillance, Heart Teams may aspire to plan and implement an optimized system of care for SHD.

Abbreviations: AS: aortic stenosis; ASD: atrioseptal defect; COVID19: Coronavirus disease 19; LAAO: left atrial appendage occlusion; MI: myocardial infarction; MR: mitral regurgitation; PFO: patent foramen ovale; PVL: paravalvular leak; SHD: structural heart disease; SAVR: surgical aortic valve replacement; SDM: shared decision-making; TAVR: transcatheter aortic valve replacement; TMVr: transcatheter mitral valve repair; TMVR: transcatheter mitral valve replacement; TEE: transesophageal echocardiography; TTE: transthoracic echocardiography.

Management of Acute Coronary Syndromes During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic: Deviations from Guidelines and Pragmatic Considerations for Patients and Healthcare Workers

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is forcing cardiology departments to rapidly adapt existing clinical guidelines to a new reality and this is especially the case for acute coronary syndrome pathways. In this focused review, the authors discuss how COVID-19 is affecting acute cardiology care and propose pragmatic guideline modifications for the diagnosis and management of acute coronary syndrome patients, particularly around the appropriateness of invasive strategies as well as length of hospital stay. The authors also discuss the use of personal protective equipment for healthcare workers in cardiology. Based on shared global experiences and growing peer-reviewed literature, it is possible to put in place modified acute coronary syndrome treatment pathways to offer safe pragmatic decisions to patients and staff.

Trajectory of Cardiac Catheterization for Acute Coronary Syndrome and Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Background

We sought to investigate the trajectory of cardiac catheterizations for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) during the pre-isolation (PI), strict-isolation (SI), and relaxed-isolation (RI) periods of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic at three hospitals in Los Angeles, CA, USA.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was conducted on adult patients undergoing urgent or emergent cardiac catheterization for suspected ACS or OHCA between January 1, 2020 and June 2, 2020 at three hospitals in Los Angeles, CA, USA. We designated January 1, 2020 to March 17, 2020 as the PI COVID-19 period, March 18, 2020 to May 5, 2020 as the SI COVID-19 period, and May 6, 2020 to June 2, 2020 as the RI COVID-19 period.

Results

From PI to SI, there was a significant reduction in mean weekly cases of catheterizations for non-ST elevation myocardial infarction/unstable angina (NSTEMI/UA) (8.29 vs. 12.5, P = 0.019), with all other clinical categories trending downwards. From SI to RI, mean weekly cases of catheterizations for total ACS increased by 17%, NSTEMI/UA increased by 27%, and OHCA increased by 32%, demonstrating a “rebound effect”.

Conclusions

Cardiac catheterizations for ACS and NSTEMI/UA exhibited a “rebound effect” once social isolation was relaxed.

Safety and operational efficiency of restructuring and redeploying a transcatheter aortic valve replacement service during the COVID-19 pandemic: The Oxford experience

BACKGROUND

The risk of nosocomial COVID-19 infection for vulnerable aortic stenosis patients and intensive care resource utilization has led to cardiac surgery deferral. Untreated severe symptomatic aortic stenosis has a dismal prognosis. TAVR offers an attractive alternative to surgery as it is not reliant on intensive care resources. We set out to explore the safety and operational efficiency of restructuring a TAVR service and redeploying it to a new non-surgical site during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

The institutional prospective service database was retrospectively interrogated for the first 50 consecutive elective TAVR cases prior to and after our institution's operational adaptations for the COVID-19 pandemic. Our endpoints were VARC-2 defined procedural complications, 30-day mortality or re-admission and service efficiency metrics.

RESULTS

The profile of patients undergoing TAVR during the pandemic was similar to patients undergoing TAVR prior to the pandemic with the exception of a lower mean age (79 vs 82 years, p < 0.01) and median EuroScore II (3.1% vs 4.6%, p = 0.01). The service restructuring and redeployment contributed to the pandemic-mandated operational efficiency with a reduction in the distribution of pre-admission hospital visits (3 vs 3 visits, p < 0.001) and the time taken from TAVR clinic to procedure (26 vs 77 days, p < 0.0001) when compared to the pre-COVID-19 service. No statistically significant difference was noted in peri-procedural complications and 30-day outcomes, while post-operative length of stay was significantly reduced (2 vs 3 days, p < 0.0001) when compared to pre-COVID-19 practice.

CONCLUSIONS

TAVR service restructuring and redeployment to align with pandemic-mandated healthcare resource rationalization is safe and feasible.

COVID-19: A Greek Perspective

Greece has managed to timely and properly implement a public health safety plan and contained the burden of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. On the contrary, COVID-19 has led to a national catastrophe in countries with superior infrastructures, such as Italy, Spain, France, and the United States. At a time when our nation's healthcare resources were insufficient to meet this unprecedented demand, it was necessary to prioritize needs in the hopes of maximizing lives saved. Although delaying definitive treatment of disorders presented a risk to specific individuals, countless others afforded life-saving resources necessary to overcome the most threatening manifestation of this illness. The cataclysm of COVID-19 offered an opportunity to reshape health care in ways that may not have seemed possible just a few months ago. To help scientists and clinicians across disciplines connect their strengths, so that together we can advance the state of the art in medicine and lead the way to a new era of computational medicine.

Implications of COVID-19 on Time-Sensitive STEMI Care: A Report From a North American Epicenter

Background

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has forced dramatic changes to the healthcare systems throughout the world. Time-sensitive management of cardiovascular emergencies such as ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) has yet to be evaluated in the context of these new policies, particularly in so-called “hot spot” cities.

Methods

We evaluated the early impact of the pandemic on STEMI performance in the Greater Montreal Area. A total of 167 patients from 3 different study periods were included. Patients presenting in the lockdown period from mid-March to mid-May 2020 (Group C, 53 patients) were compared to those from mid-March to mid-May 2019 (Group A, 60 patients) and the 2020 pre-COVID-19 period (Group B, 54 patients).

Results

The number of STEMI admissions was unaffected during the lockdown. However, significantly longer delays between symptom onset and first medical contact (FMC) were noted (Group C 189.0 IQR [70.0, 840.0] min vs. Group A 103.0 IQR [42.5, 263.0] min vs. Group B 91.0 IQR [38.0, 235.5 min], P = 0.007). In contrast, additional safety protocols do not appear to have significantly affected delays between FMC and first intracoronary device activation (Group C 102 IQR [73.0, 133.0] min vs. Group A 104 IQR [87.0, 146.0] min vs. Group B 99.5 IQR [80.0, 150.0] min, P = 0.37). Patients that presented during the outbreak were more likely to be unstable with a higher incidence of Killip classes II-IV compared to groups A and B (28.3% vs. 18.3% vs. 5.6% respectively, P = 0.008). Worse in-hospital outcomes were also noted with a significantly higher rate of major adverse cardiac events (Group A 5.0% vs. Group B 11.1% vs. Group C 22.6%, P = 0.007).

Conclusion

During the lockdown period, many patients appear to have been reluctant to present to hospitals. This was associated with more unstable STEMI presentations and worse in-hospital course. Importantly, the health care system appears able to ensure timely acute cardiac care while ensuring that COVID-19 protocols are respected.

North American COVID-19 ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (NACMI) registry: Rationale, design, and implications

The novel coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has resulted in a global pandemic. Patients with cardiovascular risk factors or established cardiovascular disease are more likely to experience severe or critical COVID-19 illness and myocardial injury is a key extra-pulmonary manifestation. These patients frequently present with ST-elevation on an electrocardiogram (ECG) due to multiple etiologies including obstructive, non-obstructive, and/or angiographically normal coronary arteries. The incidence of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) mimics in COVID-19-positive hospitalized patients, and the association with morbidity and mortality is unknown. Understanding the natural history and appropriate management of COVID-19 patients presenting with ST elevation is essential to inform patient management decisions and protect healthcare workers.

Methods

The Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) and The Canadian Association of Interventional Cardiology (CAIC) in conjunction with the American College of Cardiology Interventional Council have collaborated to create a multi-center observational registry, NACMI. This registry will enroll confirmed COVID-19 patients and persons under investigation (PUI) with new ST-segment elevation or new onset left bundle branch block (LBBB) on the ECG with clinical suspicion of myocardial ischemia. We will compare demographics, clinical findings, outcomes and management of these patients with a historical control group of over 15,000 consecutive STEMI activation patients from the Midwest STEMI Consortium using propensity matching. The primary clinical outcome will be in- hospital major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) defined as composite of all-cause mortality, stroke, recurrent MI, and repeat unplanned revascularization in COVID-19 confirmed or PUI. Secondary outcomes will include the following: reporting of etiologies of ST Elevation; cardiovascular mortality due to myocardial infarction, cardiac arrest and /or shock; individual components of the primary outcome; composite primary outcome at 1 year; as well as ECG and angiographic characteristics.

Conclusion

The multicenter NACMI registry will collect data regarding ST elevation on ECG in COVID-19 patients to determine the etiology and associated clinical outcomes. The collaboration and speed with which this registry has been created, refined, and promoted serves as a template for future research endeavors.

Committee Recommendations for Resuming Cardiac Surgery Activity in the SARS-CoV-2 Era: Guidance From an International Cardiac Surgery Consortium

Recommendations for the safe and optimized resumption of cardiac surgery care, research, and education during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) era were developed by a cardiovascular research consortium, based in 19 countries and representing a wide spectrum of experience with COVID-19. This guidance document provides a framework for restarting cardiac surgery in the outpatient and inpatient settings, in accordance with the current understanding of SARS-CoV-2, the risks posed by interrupted cardiovascular care, and the available recommendations from major societies.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation during the COVID-19 pandemic: Clinical expert opinion and consensus statement for Asia

OBJECTIVES

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the treatment of patient with aortic valve stenosis is unknown and there is uncertainty on the optimal strategies in managing these patients.

METHODS

This study is supported and endorsed by the Asia Pacific Society of Interventional Cardiology. Due to the inability to have face to face discussions during the pandemic, an online survey was performed by inviting key opinion leaders (cardiac surgeon/interventional cardiologist/echocardiologist) in the field of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in Asia to participate. The answers to a series of questions pertaining to the impact of COVID-19 on TAVI were collected and analyzed. These led subsequently to an expert consensus recommendation on the conduct of TAVI during the pandemic.

RESULTS

The COVID-19 pandemic had resulted in a 25% (10-80) reduction of case volume and 53% of operators required triaging to manage their patients with severe aortic stenosis. The two most important parameters used to triage were symptoms and valve area. Periprocedural changes included the introduction of teleconsultation, preprocedure COVID-19 testing, optimization of protests, and catheterization laboratory set up. In addition, length of stay was reduced from a mean of 4.4 to 4 days.

CONCLUSION

The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted on the delivery of TAVI services to patients in Asia. This expert recommendation on best practices may be a useful guide to help TAVI teams during this period until a COVID-19 vaccine becomes widely available.

Early Observations During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Cardiac Catheterization Procedures for ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Across Ontario

Background

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Ontario issued a declaration of emergency, implementing public health interventions on March 16, 2020.

Methods

We compared cardiac catheterization procedures for ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) between January 1 and May 10, 2020 to the same time frame in 2019.

Results

From March 16 to May 10, 2020, after implementation of provincial directives, STEMI cases significantly decreased by up to 25%. The proportion of patients who achieved guideline targets for first medical contact balloon for primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) decreased substantially to 28% (median, 101 minutes) for patients who presented directly to a PCI site and to 37% (median, 149 minutes) for patients transferred from a non-PCI site, compared with 2019.

Conclusions

STEMI cases across Ontario have been substantially affected during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Prioritizing cardiovascular surgical care in COVID-19 pandemic: Shall we operate or defer?

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has affected a large population across the world. Patients with cardiovascular disease have increased morbidity and mortality due to coronavirus disease. The burden over the health care system has to be reduced in this global pandemic to provide optimal care of patients with COVID-19, as well not compromising those who are in need of emergent cardiovascular care.

METHODS

There is a very limited data published defining which cardiovascular procedures are to be performed or to be deferred in the COVID-19 pandemic. In this article, we have reviewed a few published guidelines regarding cardiovascular surgery in COVID-19 pandemics.

CONCLUSION

After reviewing a few available guidelines regarding cardiovascular surgery in COVID-19, we conclude to perform only those surgeries which cannot be deferred to a certain period of time, to reduce the burden of the health care system of the country, provide optimal care to patients with COVID-19, and to protect health care workers and cardiovascular patients from COVID-19.

COVID-19 and its impact on cardiology service

COVID-19 has impacted the primary management of cardiac conditions, decreasing the number of interventions of coronary diseases. Elective coronary treatments and imaging have been largely cancelled across the world to make way for increased resources for COVID-19 patients. The impact on these cardiac patients during these times may be drastic. The number of hospital patients presenting with coronary symptoms during the outbreak has also decreased internationally. In this review, we discuss how COVID-19 has affected primary cardiac intervention globally and our service, possible reasons why, and how morbidity rates can be reduced by introducing scoring systems and telemedicine.

Facilitating transcatheter aortic valve implantation in the era of COVID-19: Recommendations for programmes

The COVID-19 pandemic continues to significantly impact the treatment of people living with aortic stenosis, and access to transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) programmes require unique coordinated processes that are currently experiencing multiple disruptions and are guided by rapidly evolving protocols. We present a series of recommendations for TAVI programmes to adapt to the new demands, based on recent evidence and the international expertise of nurse leaders and collaborators in this field. Although recommended in most guidelines, the uptake of the role of the TAVI programme nurse is uneven across international regions. COVID-19 is further highlighting why a nurse-led central point of coordination and communication is a vital asset for patients and programmes. We propose an alternative streamlined evaluation pathway to minimize patients' pre-procedure exposure to the hospital environment while ensuring appropriate treatment decision and shared decision-making. The competing demands created by COVID-19 require vigilant wait list management, with risk stratification, telephone surveillance and optimized triage and prioritization. A minimalist approach with close scrutiny of all parts of the procedure has become an imperative to avoid any complications and ensure patients' accelerated recovery. Lastly, we outline a nurse-led protocol of rapid mobilization and reconditioning as an effective strategy to facilitate safe next-day discharge home. As the pandemic abates, TAVI programmes must facilitate access to care without compromising patient safety, enable hospitals to manage the competing demands created by COVID-19 and establish new processes to support patients living with valvular heart disease.

Acute Coronary Syndromes and Covid-19: Exploring the Uncertainties

Since an association between myocardial infarction (MI) and respiratory infections has been described for influenza viruses and other respiratory viral agents, understanding possible physiopathological links between severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and acute coronary syndromes (ACS) is of the greatest importance. The initial data suggest an underestimation of ACS cases all over the world, but acute MI still represents a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide and should not be overshadowed during the coronavirus disease (Covid-19) pandemic. No common consensus regarding the most adequate healthcare management policy for ACS is currently available. Indeed, important differences have been reported between the measures employed to treat ACS in China during the first disease outbreak and what currently represents clinical practice across Europe and the USA. This review aims to discuss the pathophysiological links between MI, respiratory infections, and Covid-19; epidemiological data related to ACS at the time of the Covid-19 pandemic; and learnings that have emerged so far from several catheterization labs and coronary care units all over the world, in order to shed some light on the current strategies for optimal management of ACS patients with confirmed or suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Guidelines for Balancing Priorities in Structural Heart Disease During the COVID-19 Pandemic

During the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, many hospitals have been asked to postpone elective and surgical cases. This begs the question, “What is elective in structural heart disease intervention?” The recently proposed Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions/American College of Cardiology consensus statement is, unfortunately, non-specific and insufficient in its scope and scale of response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

We propose guidelines that are practical, multidisciplinary, implementable, and urgent. We believe that this will provide a helpful framework for our colleagues to manage their practices during the surge and peak phases of the pandemic.

General principles that apply across structural heart disease interventions include tracking and reporting cardiovascular outcomes, “healthcare distancing,” preserving vital resources and personnel, shared decision-making between the heart team and hospital administration on resource-intensive cases, and considering delaying research cases.

Specific guidance for transcatheter aortic valve replacement and MitraClip procedures varies according to pandemic phase. During the surge phase, treatment should broadly be limited to those at increased risk of complications in the near term. During the peak phase, treatment should be limited to inpatients for whom it may facilitate discharge.

Keeping our patients and ourselves safe is paramount, as well as justly rationing resources.

•

Many elective and surgical cases have been postponed during the COVID-19 pandemic.

•

We propose guidelines for managing structural heart disease during the pandemic.

•

General principles include preserving vital resources and personnel.

•

Specific guidance for TAVR and mitral valve repair changes with pandemic phase.

•

Keeping our patients and ourselves safe and justly rationing resources is paramount.

Treatment of ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction During COVID-19 Pandemic

The number of cases of the coronavirus-induced disease-2019 (COVID-19) continues to increase exponentially worldwide. In this crisis situation, the management of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is challenging. In this review, we outline the risks and benefits of primary PCI vs. thrombolysis for STEMI. While thrombolysis may seem like a good choice, many patients have a contraindication and could end up using more resources. Also, with a high probability of the angiogram showing non-obstructed coronary arteries during acute infections, primary PCI should be the preferred strategy.

•

During the COVID-19 pandemic, management of STSTEMI is challenging.

•

Many patients have a contraindication to thrombolysis and end up using resources with this treatment.

•

There is a high probability that an infected patient will show a normal angiogram.

•

Primary PCI should be the preferred strategy in STEMI patients, with precautions.

The Use of Decision Modelling to Inform Timely Policy Decisions on Cardiac Resource Capacity During the COVID-19 Pandemic

In Ontario on March 16, 2020, a directive was issued to all acute care hospitals to halt nonessential procedures in anticipation of a potential surge in COVID-19 patients. This included scheduled outpatient cardiac surgical and interventional procedures that required the use of intensive care units, ventilators, and skilled critical care personnel, given that these procedures would draw from the same pool of resources required for critically ill COVID-19 patients. We adapted the COVID-19 Resource Estimator (CORE) decision analytic model by adding a cardiac component to determine the impact of various policy decisions on the incremental waitlist growth and estimated waitlist mortality for 3 key groups of cardiovascular disease patients: coronary artery disease, valvular heart disease, and arrhythmias. We provided predictions based on COVID-19 epidemiology available in real-time, in 3 phases. First, in the initial crisis phase, in a worst case scenario, we showed that the potential number of waitlist related cardiac deaths would be orders of magnitude less than those who would die of COVID-19 if critical cardiac care resources were diverted to the care of COVID-19 patients. Second, with better local epidemiology data, we predicted that across 5 regions of Ontario, there may be insufficient resources to resume all elective outpatient cardiac procedures. Finally in the recovery phase, we showed that the estimated incremental growth in waitlist for all cardiac procedures is likely substantial. These outputs informed timely data-driven decisions during the COVID-19 pandemic regarding the provision of cardiovascular care.

Cardiovascular Implications of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Global Perspective

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), represents the pandemic of the century, with approximately 3.5 million cases and 250,000 deaths worldwide as of May 2020. Although respiratory symptoms usually dominate the clinical presentation, COVID-19 is now known to also have potentially serious cardiovascular consequences, including myocardial injury, myocarditis, acute coronary syndromes, pulmonary embolism, stroke, arrhythmias, heart failure, and cardiogenic shock. The cardiac manifestations of COVID-19 might be related to the adrenergic drive, systemic inflammatory milieu and cytokine-release syndrome caused by SARS-CoV-2, direct viral infection of myocardial and endothelial cells, hypoxia due to respiratory failure, electrolytic imbalances, fluid overload, and side effects of certain COVID-19 medications. COVID-19 has profoundly reshaped usual care of both ambulatory and acute cardiac patients, by leading to the cancellation of elective procedures and by reducing the efficiency of existing pathways of urgent care, respectively. Decreased use of health care services for acute conditions by non-COVID-19 patients has also been reported and attributed to concerns about acquiring in-hospital infection. Innovative approaches that leverage modern technologies to tackle the COVID-19 pandemic have been introduced, which include telemedicine, dissemination of educational material over social media, smartphone apps for case tracking, and artificial intelligence for pandemic modelling, among others. This article provides a comprehensive overview of the pathophysiology and cardiovascular implications of COVID-19, its impact on existing pathways of care, the role of modern technologies to tackle the pandemic, and a proposal of novel management algorithms for the most common acute cardiac conditions.

Artificial Intelligence-Empowered Mobilization of Assessments in COVID-19-like Pandemics: A Case Study for Early Flattening of the Curve

The global outbreak of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has uncovered the fragility of healthcare and public health preparedness and planning against epidemics/pandemics. In addition to the medical practice for treatment and immunization, it is vital to have a thorough understanding of community spread phenomena as related research reports 17.9–30.8% confirmed cases to remain asymptomatic. Therefore, an effective assessment strategy is vital to maximize tested population in a short amount of time. This article proposes an Artificial Intelligence (AI)-driven mobilization strategy for mobile assessment agents for epidemics/pandemics. To this end, a self-organizing feature map (SOFM) is trained by using data acquired from past mobile crowdsensing (MCS) campaigns to model mobility patterns of individuals in multiple districts of a city so to maximize the assessed population with minimum agents in the shortest possible time. Through simulation results for a real street map on a mobile crowdsensing simulator and considering the worst case analysis, it is shown that on the 15th day following the first confirmed case in the city under the risk of community spread, AI-enabled mobilization of assessment centers can reduce the unassessed population size down to one fourth of the unassessed population under the case when assessment agents are randomly deployed over the entire city.

Caution regarding potential changes in AVR practices during the COVID-19 pandemic

To improve resource allocation in face of the COVID‐19 pandemic, hospitals around the country are restricting the performance of elective surgery to preserve ventilators, operating rooms, ICU beds and protect anesthesiologists. For patients with severe aortic stenosis, efforts to bring treatment to symptomatic patients amid this pandemic might lead to favored use of catheter based management using minimalist techniques that do not require these elements. In this context, some patients with well tested surgical indications for valve replacement may be treated by catheter‐based methods. It is important that outcomes for these cases are followed closely both at respective sites and in national registries. As we recover from this pandemic, surgical cases should once again be driven by multi‐disciplinary discussion and clinical trial data, and not a mentality of crisis management.

An In-hospital Pathway for Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients During the COVID-19 Outbreak: Initial Experience Under Real-World Suboptimal Conditions

Owing to the COVID-19 outbreak in Lombardy, Italy) there is an urgent need to manage cardiovascular emergencies, including acute coronary syndrome (ACS), with appropriate standards of care and dedicated preventive measures and pathways against the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. For this reason, the Government of Lombardy decided to centralize the treatment of ACS patients in a limited number of centers, including our university cardiology institute, which in the past 4 weeks became a cardiovascular emergency referral center in a regional hub-and-spoke system. Therefore, we rapidly developed a customized pathway to allocate patients to the appropriate hospital ward, and treat them according to ACS severity and risk of suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection. We present here the protocol dedicated to ACS patients adopted in our center since March 13, 2020, and our initial experience in the management of ACS patients during the first 4 weeks of its use. Certainly, the protocol has room for further improvement as everyone's experience grows, but we hope that it could be a starting point, adaptable to different realities and local resources.

Cardiac Surgery in Canada During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Guidance Statement From the Canadian Society of Cardiac Surgeons

On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization declared that COVID-19 was a pandemic.¹ At that time, only 118,000 cases had been reported globally, 90% of which had occurred in 4 countries.¹ Since then, the world landscape has changed dramatically. As of March 31, 2020, there are now nearly 800,000 cases, with truly global involvement.² Countries that were previously unaffected are currently experiencing mounting rates of the novel coronavirus infection with associated increases in COVID-19–related deaths. At present, Canada has more than 8000 cases of COVID-19, with considerable variation in rates of infection among provinces and territories.³ Amid concerns over growing resource constraints, cardiac surgeons from across Canada have been forced to make drastic changes to their clinical practices. From prioritizing and delaying elective cases to altering therapeutic strategies in high-risk patients, cardiac surgeons, along with their heart teams, are having to reconsider how best to manage their patients. It is with this in mind that the Canadian Society of Cardiac Surgeons (CSCS) and its Board of Directors have come together to formulate a series of guiding statements. With strong representation from across the country and the support of the Canadian Cardiovascular Society, the authors have attempted to provide guidance to their colleagues on the subjects of leadership roles that cardiac surgeons may assume during this pandemic: patient assessment and triage, risk reduction, and real-time sharing of expertise and experiences.