Abstract
INTRODUCTION The Coronavirus pandemic has hit the world with its vast contagiousness, high morbidity, and mortality. Apart from the direct damage to the lung tissue, the corona virus infection is able to predispose patients to thrombotic disease, thus causing cerebral or coronary incidents.
AIMS The aim of this study was to find a clinical or laboratory parameter, that would help in distinguishing between COVID-19 patients with myocardial infarction (MI), who have an infarct-related artery (IRA) and therefore, require immediate revascularization, and those, who have no IRA.
METHODS This was a single-center, observational study of 10 consecutive patients with COVID-19, who were admitted with confirmed MI.
RESULTS In our study group the mean age was 67.5 ± 8.3 years, half of the patients were female; all of them had arterial hypertension; 8 patients (80%) had dyslipidemy; 4 (40%) had diabetes. 30% of the patients with MI did not have an IRA, and did not require pPCI. Patients with MI and IRA had significantly higher hsTrI values (48.9 ± 43.2 vs 0.6 ± 0.7, p=0.007) and exclusively typical chest pain 100% vs 0%, p=0.007), compared to patients with MI without an IRA. The ECG changes had only marginal statistical significance. Our results suggest that using a higher cut-off value for hsTrI (>7.5 times upper reference range) increases the specificity and positive predictive value for diagnosing a MI with the presence of IRA and need for pPCI, to 100%
CONCLUSION In our analysis we confirm that a higher cut-off value for hsTrI helps distinguish between COVID patients with MI, who have IRA and therefore, require immediate revascularization, compared to those, who have no IRA.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Funded by University hospital Heart and brain - Pleven, Bulgaria
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Approval was given by the institutional review board, consisting of assoc. prof. Iana Simova (Heart and Brain Center of Excellence University Hospital, Pleven, Bulgaria; Bulgarian Cardiac Institute), prof. Nikolay Dimitrov (Heart and Brain Center of Excellence University Hospital, Pleven, Bulgaria; Heart and Brain Center of Excellence University Hospital, Burgas, Bulgaria), prof. Toni Vekov (Bulgarian Cardiac Institute) Ethics All patients signed an informed consent for coronary angiography and PCI, and for personal data analysis. The study protocol is in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS statistical software for Windows version 19.0. The distribution of continuous variables was tested using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. Normally distributed data were presented as mean +/− standard deviation (SD), whereas non-normally distributed data - as median and interquartile range (IQR) (the difference between the 25th and 75th percentile). Categorical variables were presented in percentage terms. We compared differences between groups with Independent-Samples T-Test. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV) were calculated according to the true positive (TP), false positive (FP), true negative (TN) and false negative (FN) results, using the following formulas: Sensitivity = TP/(TP+FN); Specificity = TN/(TN+FP); PPV = TP/(TP+FP); NPV = TN/(TN+FN). A two-tailed p value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
