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

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.