How did COVID-19 affect medical and cardiology journals? A pandemic in literature

Utilizing non-human primate models to combat recent COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2 and viral infectious disease outbreaks

In recent times, global viral outbreaks and diseases, such as COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2), Zika (ZIKV), monkeypox (MPOX), Ebola (EBOV), and Marburg (MARV), have been extensively documented. Swiftly deciphering the mechanisms underlying disease pathogenesis and devising vaccines or therapeutic interventions to curtail these outbreaks stand as paramount imperatives. Amidst these endeavors, animal models emerge as pivotal tools. Among these models, non-human primates (NHPs) hold a position of particular importance. Their proximity in evolutionary lineage and physiological resemblances to humans render them a primary model for comprehending human viral infections. This review encapsulates the pivotal role of various NHP species-such as rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta), cynomolgus macaques (Macaca fascicularis), african green monkeys (Chlorocebus sabaeus/aethiops), pigtailed macaques (Macaca nemestrina/Macaca leonina), baboons (Papio hamadryas/Papio anubis), and common marmosets (Callithrix jacchus)-in investigations pertaining to the abovementioned viral outbreaks. These NHP models play a pivotal role in illuminating key aspects of disease dynamics, facilitating the development of effective countermeasures, and contributing significantly to our overall understanding of viral pathogenesis.

A global analysis of implants and replacements of pacemakers and cardioverter-defibrillators before, during, and after the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy

At the beginning of the COVID-19 emergency, non-urgent surgical procedures had to be deferred, but also emergencies were reduced. To assess the global trend of pacemaker (PM) and implantable cardiac-defibrillator (ICD) procedures performed in Italy before, during, and after the first COVID-19 emergency, all the Italian hospital discharge records related to PM/ICD procedures performed between 2012 and 2021, sent to the National Institute of Health, were reviewed. Compared to 2019, in 2020, there was a reduction of first PM implants (52,216 to 43,962, -16%; p < 0.01), but not replacements (16,591 to 17,331, + 4%; p = 0.16). In particular, in April 2020, there was a drop of first implants (- 53,4% vs the average value of April 2018 and April 2019; p < 0.01), while the reduction of replacements was less evident (-32.6%; p = NS). In 2021, PM procedures increased to values similar to the pre-pandemic period. A reduction of ICD procedures was observed in 2020 (22,355, -7% toward 2019), mainly in April 2020 (- 46% vs April 2018/April 2019; p = 0.03). In 2021, the rate of ICD procedures increased (+ 14% toward 2020). A non-significant reduction of "urgent" procedures (complete atrioventricular block for PM and ventricular fibrillation for ICD), even in April 2020, was observed. In 2020, there was a reduction of first PM implants and ICDs, offset by increased activity in 2021. No decrease in PM replacements was observed, and the drop in "urgent" PM and ICD procedures was not statistically significant.

Five waves of COVID-19 pandemic in Italy: results of a national survey evaluating the impact on activities related to arrhythmias, pacing, and electrophysiology promoted by AIAC (Italian Association of Arrhythmology and Cardiac Pacing)

BACKGROUND

The subsequent waves of the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy had a major impact on cardiac care.

METHODS

A survey to evaluate the dynamic changes in arrhythmia care during the first five waves of COVID-19 in Italy (first: March-May 2020; second: October 2020-January 2021; third: February-May 2021; fourth: June-October 2021; fifth: November 2021-February 2022) was launched.

RESULTS

A total of 127 physicians from arrhythmia centers (34% of Italian centers) took part in the survey. As compared to 2019, a reduction in 40% of elective pacemaker (PM), defibrillators (ICD), and cardiac resynchronization devices (CRT) implantations, with a 70% reduction for ablations, was reported during the first wave, with a progressive and gradual return to pre-pandemic volumes, generally during the third-fourth waves, slower for ablations. For emergency procedures (PM, ICD, CRT, and ablations), recovery from the initial 10% decline occurred in most cases during the second wave, with some variability. However, acute care for atrial fibrillation, electrical cardioversions, and evaluations for syncope showed a prolonged reduction of activity. The number of patients with devices which started remote monitoring increased by 40% during the first wave, but then the adoption of remote monitoring declined.

CONCLUSIONS

The dramatic and profound derangement in arrhythmia management that characterized the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic was followed by a progressive return to the volume of activities of the pre-pandemic periods, even if with different temporal dynamics and some heterogeneity. Remote monitoring was largely implemented during the first wave, but full implementation is needed.

Reimbursement practices for use of digital devices in atrial fibrillation and other arrhythmias: a European Heart Rhythm Association survey

AIMS

Since digital devices are increasingly used in cardiology for assessing cardiac rhythm and detecting arrhythmias, especially atrial fibrillation (AF), our aim was to evaluate the expectations and opinions of healthcare professionals in Europe on reimbursement policies for the use of digital devices (including wearables) in AF and other arrhythmias.

METHODS AND RESULTS

An anonymous survey was proposed through announcements on the European Heart Rhythm Association website, social media channels, and mail newsletter. Two hundred and seventeen healthcare professionals participated in the survey: 32.7%, reported regular use of digital devices, 45.2% reported that they sometimes use these tools, 18.6% that they do not use but would like to. Only a minority (3.5%) reported a lack of trust in digital devices. The survey highlighted a general propensity to provide medical consultation for suspected AF or other arrhythmias detected by a consumer-initiated use of digital devices, even if time constraints and reimbursement availability emerged as important elements. More than 85% of respondents agreed that reimbursement should be applied for clinical use of digital devices, also in different settings such as post-stroke, post-cardioversion, post-ablation, and in patients with palpitations or syncope. Finally, 73.6% of respondents confirmed a lack of reimbursement fees in their country for physicians' consultations (tracings interpretation) related to digital devices.

CONCLUSIONS

Digital devices, including wearables, are increasingly and widely used for assessing cardiac rhythm and detecting AF, but a definition of reimbursement policies for physicians' consultations is needed.

Animal models for COVID-19: advances, gaps and perspectives

COVID-19, caused by SARS-CoV-2, is the most consequential pandemic of this century. Since the outbreak in late 2019, animal models have been playing crucial roles in aiding the rapid development of vaccines/drugs for prevention and therapy, as well as understanding the pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2 infection and immune responses of hosts. However, the current animal models have some deficits and there is an urgent need for novel models to evaluate the virulence of variants of concerns (VOC), antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE), and various comorbidities of COVID-19. This review summarizes the clinical features of COVID-19 in different populations, and the characteristics of the major animal models of SARS-CoV-2, including those naturally susceptible animals, such as non-human primates, Syrian hamster, ferret, minks, poultry, livestock, and mouse models sensitized by genetically modified, AAV/adenoviral transduced, mouse-adapted strain of SARS-CoV-2, and by engraftment of human tissues or cells. Since understanding the host receptors and proteases is essential for designing advanced genetically modified animal models, successful studies on receptors and proteases are also reviewed. Several improved alternatives for future mouse models are proposed, including the reselection of alternative receptor genes or multiple gene combinations, the use of transgenic or knock-in method, and different strains for establishing the next generation of genetically modified mice.