Clinical particulars of acute coronary syndrome course in patients with COVID-19

Nadezhda V. Izmozherova, Artem A. Popov, Andrey I. Tsvetkov, Leonid I. Kadnikov, Vladislav E. Ispavskii, Muraz A. Shambatov
{"title":"Clinical particulars of acute coronary syndrome course in patients with COVID-19","authors":"Nadezhda V. Izmozherova, Artem A. Popov, Andrey I. Tsvetkov, Leonid I. Kadnikov, Vladislav E. Ispavskii, Muraz A. Shambatov","doi":"10.18786/2072-0505-2023-51-033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Cardiovascular complications of COVID-19 result in challenges for differential diagnosis, patients referral and treatment, which negatively affect the outcomes.
 Aim: To identify clinical particulars of various types acute coronary syndrome course in patients with COVID-19.
 Materials and methods: This retrospective cross-sectional study included 202 patients with COVID-19 and acute coronary syndrome (ACS) admitted to a primary vascular medicine center from September to December 2020. Their medical records were used for the analysis of ACS and COVID-19 clinical course, including physical and history data, laboratory and instrumental work-up. For the analysis, the patient sampling was divided into three study groups: 50 patients with unstable angina (UA), 107 patients with acute myocardial infarction with ST segment elevation (STEMI), and 45 patients with acute myocardial infarction without ST segment elevation (non-STEMI).
 Results: There were no differences in clinical manifestations of ACS in the study groups. As far as clinical manifestations of coronavirus infections are concerned, the patients differed significantly as per prevalence of fever and dry cough. Fever was present in 22 (44%) UA patients, 18 (17%) of STEMI patients and in 10 (22%) of non-STEMI patients (p 0.001 for comparison of 3 groups, Kruskall-Wallis test), whereas dry cough was present in 18 (36%), 19 (18%), and 14 (31%) patients, respectively (p = 0.029). Paired comparison (Mann-Whitney test with Bonferroni adjustment) showed significant differences between US and STEMI groups for both symptoms. The number of involved vessels (median [25%; 75%]) in UA patients was 0 [0; 2], in STEMI and non-STEMI patients 2 [1; 3] (p 0.001). A left coronary artery stenosis was detected in 2 (6%) of the UA patients, 13 (14%) of the STEMI and 4 (13%) of the non-STEMI patients (p = 0.452); left anterior descending artery stenosis, in 12 (36%), 67 (72%) and 23 (72%) patients, respectively (p 0.001). In the pairwise comparison, there were differences between UA and STEMI groups and between UA and non-STEMI groups. A left circumflex artery stenosis was found in 7 (21%) of the UA patients, 45 (48%) of the STEMI and 18 (56%) of the non-STEMI patients (p = 0.008); the pairwise comparisons showed the difference between UA and non-STEMI study groups. A right coronary artery stenosis was identified in 9 (27%), 64 (69%) and 18 (56%) of the study patients, respectively (p 0.001); in the pairwise comparison the difference was found between the UA and STEMI group. There were significant differences in the percentage of the right descendent and right coronary artery stenosis: the right descending artery stenosis was 70% [45; 80] in the UA patients, 90% [70; 100] in the STEMI and 95% [70; 100] in the non-STEMI patients (p = 0.013), whereas the right coronary artery stenosis was 50% [45; 80], 90% [70; 100], 90% [60; 100], respectively (p = 0.018). In the pairwise comparison, the differences were found between the UA and STEMI patients in both arteries. The STEMI patients had higher TIMI thrombus grade scores than those with non-STEMI: 3 [0; 5] vs 0 [0; 4] (p = 0.023). The rates of successful percutaneous coronary intervention and achievement of TIMI flow grade 3 between them was not significantly different (p = 0.170).
 Conclusion: The ACS patients with ACS and COVID-19 have high thrombotic load according to coronary angiography and TIMI score in the case of STEMI and more frequent absence of hemodynamically significant stenosis in those with UA and non-STEMI. The absence of any difference in clinical manifestations of ACS and viral infection between the study groups (except fever and dry cough difference between the UA and STEMI patients) indicates that specific characteristics of the ACS course in COVID-19 patients can be identified only by coronaroangiography.","PeriodicalId":31492,"journal":{"name":"Al''manah Kliniceskoj Mediciny","volume":"4 8","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Al''manah Kliniceskoj Mediciny","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18786/2072-0505-2023-51-033","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Cardiovascular complications of COVID-19 result in challenges for differential diagnosis, patients referral and treatment, which negatively affect the outcomes. Aim: To identify clinical particulars of various types acute coronary syndrome course in patients with COVID-19. Materials and methods: This retrospective cross-sectional study included 202 patients with COVID-19 and acute coronary syndrome (ACS) admitted to a primary vascular medicine center from September to December 2020. Their medical records were used for the analysis of ACS and COVID-19 clinical course, including physical and history data, laboratory and instrumental work-up. For the analysis, the patient sampling was divided into three study groups: 50 patients with unstable angina (UA), 107 patients with acute myocardial infarction with ST segment elevation (STEMI), and 45 patients with acute myocardial infarction without ST segment elevation (non-STEMI). Results: There were no differences in clinical manifestations of ACS in the study groups. As far as clinical manifestations of coronavirus infections are concerned, the patients differed significantly as per prevalence of fever and dry cough. Fever was present in 22 (44%) UA patients, 18 (17%) of STEMI patients and in 10 (22%) of non-STEMI patients (p 0.001 for comparison of 3 groups, Kruskall-Wallis test), whereas dry cough was present in 18 (36%), 19 (18%), and 14 (31%) patients, respectively (p = 0.029). Paired comparison (Mann-Whitney test with Bonferroni adjustment) showed significant differences between US and STEMI groups for both symptoms. The number of involved vessels (median [25%; 75%]) in UA patients was 0 [0; 2], in STEMI and non-STEMI patients 2 [1; 3] (p 0.001). A left coronary artery stenosis was detected in 2 (6%) of the UA patients, 13 (14%) of the STEMI and 4 (13%) of the non-STEMI patients (p = 0.452); left anterior descending artery stenosis, in 12 (36%), 67 (72%) and 23 (72%) patients, respectively (p 0.001). In the pairwise comparison, there were differences between UA and STEMI groups and between UA and non-STEMI groups. A left circumflex artery stenosis was found in 7 (21%) of the UA patients, 45 (48%) of the STEMI and 18 (56%) of the non-STEMI patients (p = 0.008); the pairwise comparisons showed the difference between UA and non-STEMI study groups. A right coronary artery stenosis was identified in 9 (27%), 64 (69%) and 18 (56%) of the study patients, respectively (p 0.001); in the pairwise comparison the difference was found between the UA and STEMI group. There were significant differences in the percentage of the right descendent and right coronary artery stenosis: the right descending artery stenosis was 70% [45; 80] in the UA patients, 90% [70; 100] in the STEMI and 95% [70; 100] in the non-STEMI patients (p = 0.013), whereas the right coronary artery stenosis was 50% [45; 80], 90% [70; 100], 90% [60; 100], respectively (p = 0.018). In the pairwise comparison, the differences were found between the UA and STEMI patients in both arteries. The STEMI patients had higher TIMI thrombus grade scores than those with non-STEMI: 3 [0; 5] vs 0 [0; 4] (p = 0.023). The rates of successful percutaneous coronary intervention and achievement of TIMI flow grade 3 between them was not significantly different (p = 0.170). Conclusion: The ACS patients with ACS and COVID-19 have high thrombotic load according to coronary angiography and TIMI score in the case of STEMI and more frequent absence of hemodynamically significant stenosis in those with UA and non-STEMI. The absence of any difference in clinical manifestations of ACS and viral infection between the study groups (except fever and dry cough difference between the UA and STEMI patients) indicates that specific characteristics of the ACS course in COVID-19 patients can be identified only by coronaroangiography.
新冠肺炎患者急性冠脉综合征病程临床特点分析
背景:COVID-19心血管并发症给鉴别诊断、患者转诊和治疗带来挑战,对预后产生负面影响。 目的:了解新冠肺炎患者不同类型急性冠脉综合征病程的临床特点。 材料与方法:本回顾性横断面研究纳入2020年9月至12月在一家初级血管医学中心收治的202例COVID-19合并急性冠脉综合征(ACS)患者。他们的医疗记录用于分析ACS和COVID-19的临床过程,包括身体和病史数据,实验室和仪器检查。为了进行分析,将患者样本分为三个研究组:50例不稳定型心绞痛(UA)患者,107例急性心肌梗死伴ST段抬高(STEMI)患者和45例急性心肌梗死无ST段抬高(non-STEMI)患者。结果:两组ACS的临床表现无明显差异。在冠状病毒感染的临床表现方面,患者在发烧和干咳患病率方面存在显著差异。UA患者中有22例(44%)发热,STEMI患者中有18例(17%)发热,非STEMI患者中有10例(22%)发热(三组比较,Kruskall-Wallis试验,p < 0.001),而干咳分别有18例(36%)、19例(18%)和14例(31%)发热(p = 0.029)。配对比较(Mann-Whitney检验加Bonferroni校正)显示,美国组和STEMI组在两种症状上存在显著差异。受累血管数(中位数[25%;75%])为0 [0;2],在STEMI和非STEMI患者中2 [1;[3] (p 0.001)。UA患者中2例(6%)、STEMI患者中13例(14%)、非STEMI患者中4例(13%)存在左冠状动脉狭窄(p = 0.452);左侧前降支狭窄分别为12例(36%)、67例(72%)和23例(72%)(p < 0.001)。在两两比较中,UA组和STEMI组之间以及UA组和非STEMI组之间存在差异。UA患者中有7例(21%)、STEMI患者有45例(48%)、非STEMI患者有18例(56%)存在左旋动脉狭窄(p = 0.008);两两比较显示UA和非stemi研究组之间的差异。右冠状动脉狭窄分别在9例(27%)、64例(69%)和18例(56%)的研究患者中发现(p < 0.001);在两两比较中,UA组和STEMI组之间存在差异。右降支和右冠状动脉狭窄比例差异有统计学意义:右降支狭窄占70% [45];80]在UA患者中,90% [70;在STEMI和95% [70;非stemi患者中右冠状动脉狭窄发生率为50% (p = 0.013) [45;80], 90% [70;100], 90% [60;100], p = 0.018。在两两比较中,UA和STEMI患者在两条动脉中均存在差异。STEMI患者的TIMI血栓分级评分高于非STEMI患者:3 [0;5] vs . 0 [0;[4] (p = 0.023)。两组经皮冠状动脉介入治疗成功率和TIMI血流3级率差异无统计学意义(p = 0.170)。 结论:ACS合并ACS和COVID-19患者在STEMI情况下冠脉造影和TIMI评分显示血栓负荷高,UA和非STEMI患者更常见无血流动力学意义的狭窄。各组间ACS临床表现及病毒感染无差异(UA患者与STEMI患者发热、干咳差异除外),说明COVID-19患者ACS病程的具体特征只能通过冠状动脉造影来识别。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
42
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信