Decreased door-to-balloon time in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction during the early COVID-19 pandemic in South Korea: An observational study

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article See related articles

Abstract

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) resulted in a marked decrease in the number of patient visits for acute myocardial infarction and delayed patient response and intervention in several countries. This study evaluated the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the number of patients, patient response time (pain-to-door), and intervention time (door-to-balloon) for patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI).

Patients with STEMI or NSTEMI visiting a hospital in South Korea who underwent primary coronary intervention during the COVID-19 pandemic (January 29, 2020, to December 31, 2020) were compared with those in the equivalent period from 2018 to 2019. Patient response and intervention times were compared for the COVID-19 pandemic window (2020) and the equivalent period from 2018 to 2019.

We observed no decrease in the number of patients with STEMI ( P = .88) and NSTEMI ( P = 1.00) during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to that in the previous years. Patient response times (STEMI: P = .39; NSTEMI: P = .59) during the overall COVID-19 pandemic period did not differ significantly. However, we identified a significant decrease in door-to-balloon time among patients with STEMI (14%; P < .01) during the early COVID-19 pandemic.

We found that the number of patients with STEMI and NSTEMI was consistent during the COVID-19 pandemic and that no time delays in patient response and intervention occurred. However, the door-to-balloon time among patients with STEMI significantly reduced during the early COVID-19 pandemic, which could be attributed to decreased emergency care utilization during the early pandemic.

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.09.17.21263760: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Ethicsnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.


    Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code and data.


    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    This study had limitations. First, we considered the number of patients in our study as a proxy of the incidence of AMI in the North Jeolla Province. Second, we did not account for patients that transferred to regions outside of the North Jeolla province. However, our study also had several strengths. First, this is the first study to assess changes in the number of patients with STEMI and NSTEMI in South Korea, where no lockdown strategy was incorporated as a measure against the COVID-19 pandemic. Furthermore, our study measured the time between symptom onset to first medical contact and first medical contact to PCI, which is the first evaluation of this kind during the specified time period for patients with STEMI and NSTEMI in South Korea.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.


    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.


    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.


    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.


    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.