Browsing by Author "Vasiljevic-Pokrajcic, Zorana (6602641182)"

The cardiovascular system is significantly affected in coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19). Microvascular injury, endothelial dysfunction, and thrombosis resulting from viral infection or indirectly related to the intense systemic inflammatory and immune responses are characteristic features of severe COVID-19. Pre-existing cardiovascular disease and viral load are linked to myocardial injury and worse outcomes. The vascular response to cytokine production and the interaction between severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) and angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 receptor may lead to a significant reduction in cardiac contractility and subsequent myocardial dysfunction. In addition, a considerable proportion of patients who have been infected with SARS-CoV-2 do not fully recover and continue to experience a large number of symptoms and post-acute complications in the absence of a detectable viral infection. This conditions often referred to as 'post-acute COVID-19' may have multiple causes. Viral reservoirs or lingering fragments of viral RNA or proteins contribute to the condition. Systemic inflammatory response to COVID-19 has the potential to increase myocardial fibrosis which in turn may impair cardiac remodelling. Here, we summarize the current knowledge of cardiovascular injury and post-acute sequelae of COVID-19. As the pandemic continues and new variants emerge, we can advance our knowledge of the underlying mechanisms only by integrating our understanding of the pathophysiology with the corresponding clinical findings. Identification of new biomarkers of cardiovascular complications, and development of effective treatments for COVID-19 infection are of crucial importance. © 2021 Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.

Objectives This study aimed to assess the clinical impact of immediate versus delayed invasive intervention in patients with non-ST-segment myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). Background Previous studies found conflicting results on the effects of earlier invasive intervention in a heterogeneous population of acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment elevation. Methods We randomized 323 NSTEMI patients to an immediate-intervention group (<2 h after randomization, n = 162) and a delayed-intervention group (2 to 72 h, n = 161).The primary endpoint was the occurrence of death or new myocardial infarction (MI) at 30-day follow-up. Results Median time from randomization to angiography was 1.4 h and 61.0 h in the immediate-intervention group and the delayed-intervention group, respectively (p < 0.001). At 30 days, the primary endpoint was achieved less frequently in patients undergoing immediate intervention (4.3% vs. 13%, hazard ratio: 0.32, 95% confidence interval: 0.13 to 0.74; p = 0.008). At 1 year, this difference persisted (6.8% in the immediate-intervention group vs. 18.8% in delayed-intervention group; hazard ratio: 0.34, 95% confidence interval: 0.17 to 0.67; p = 0.002). The observed results were mainly attributable to the occurrence of new MI in the pre-catheterization period (0 deaths + 0 MIs in the immediate-intervention group vs. 1 death + 10 MIs in the delayed-intervention group). The rate of deaths, new MI, or recurrent ischemia was lower in the immediate-intervention group at both 30 days (6.8% vs. 26.7%; p < 0.001) and 1 year (15.4% vs. 33.1%; p < 0.001). Conclusions Immediate invasive strategy in NSTEMI patients is associated with lower rates of death or new MI compared with the delayed invasive strategy at early and midterm follow-up, mainly due to a decrease in the risk of new MI in the pre-catheterization period. (Immediate Versus Delayed Invasive Intervention for Non-STEMI Patients [RIDDLE-NSTEMI]; NCT02419833) © 2016 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.

Previous studies compared clinical outcomes of early versus delayed invasive strategy in patients with non–ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome up to 1-year follow-up, but long-term data remain scarce. Our aim was to evaluate the long-term effects of immediate invasive intervention in patients with Non–ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction (NSTEMI). The Randomized Study of Immediate Versus Delayed Invasive Intervention in Patients With Non–ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction (RIDDLE-NSTEMI) was a randomized, investigator-initiated, parallel-group trial that assigned 323 patients with NSTEMI (1:1) to either immediate (median time to intervention 1.4 hours) or delayed invasive strategy (61.0 hours). The primary end point was the composite of death or new myocardial infarction (MI). At 3 years, immediate invasive intervention was associated with a lower rate of death or new MI, compared with a delayed invasive strategy (12.3% vs 22.5%, hazard ratio 0.50, 95% confidence interval 0.29 to 0.87, p = 0.014). The observed benefit of immediate intervention was mainly driven by an increased early reinfarction risk in delayed strategy, with similar new MI rates beyond 30 days (4.4% in the immediate and 5.6% in the delayed group, p = 0.61). Three-year mortality was 9.3% in the immediate invasive strategy, and 10.0% in the delayed strategy (p = 0.83). High baseline Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events score (>140) was associated with a significant increase in long-term mortality, regardless of the timing of invasive intervention. In conclusion, whereas immediate invasive intervention significantly reduced the early risk of new MI, the timing of invasive intervention appears to have no significant impact on clinical outcomes beyond 30 days, which seem to mostly be related to the baseline clinical risk profile. © 2018 Elsevier Inc.