Current Status of Endovascular Training for Cardiothoracic Surgery Residents in the United States

Background Endovascular interventions for cardiovascular pathology are becoming increasingly relevant to cardiothoracic surgery. This study assessed the perceived prevalence and efficacy of endovascular skills training and identified differences among training paradigms. Methods Trainee responses to questions in the 2016 In-Service Training Examination survey regarding endovascular training were analyzed based on the four different cardiothoracic surgery training pathways: traditional 2- and 3-year thoracic, integrated 6-year, and combined 4+3 general and thoracic residency programs. Results The duration of endovascular training was substantially different among programs, at a median of 17 weeks for integrated 6-year, 8.5 weeks for 3-year, 6 weeks for 4+3, and 4 weeks for 2-year residency (p < 0.0001). After adjusting for year of training and program type, the duration of endovascular rotations was significantly associated with self-assessed comfort with catheter-based skills (p < 0.0001). Eighty-two percent of residents rotated with trainees from other specialties, and 58% experienced competition for cases. Residents reported greater exposure to transcatheter aortic valve replacement than to thoracic endovascular aortic repair, cardiac catheterization, percutaneous closure of atrial septal defect, and transcatheter mitral valve surgery (p < 0.0001). A significant proportion of responders reported feeling uncomfortable performing key steps of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (52%) or thoracic endovascular aortic repair (49%). Conclusions Considerable heterogeneity exists in endovascular training among cardiothoracic surgery training pathways, with a significant number of residents having minimal to no exposure to these emerging techniques. These findings highlight the need for a standardized curriculum to improve endovascular exposure and training

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on STEMI care: An expanded analysis from the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of COVID-19 pandemic migitation measures on of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) care. BACKGROUND: We previously reported a 38% decline in cardiac catheterization activations during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic mitigation measures. This study extends our early observations using a larger sample of STEMI programs representative of different US regions with the inclusion of more contemporary data. METHODS: Data from 18 hospitals or healthcare systems in the US from January 2019 to April 2020 were collecting including number activations for STEMI, the number of activations leading to angiography and primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI), and average door to balloon (D2B) times. Two periods, January 2019-February 2020 and March-April 2020, were defined to represent periods before (BC) and after (AC) initiation of pandemic mitigation measures, respectively. A generalized estimating equations approach was used to estimate the change in response variables at AC from BC. RESULTS: Compared to BC, the AC period was characterized by a marked reduction in the number of activations for STEMI (29%, 95% CI:18-38, p \u3c .001), number of activations leading to angiography (34%, 95% CI: 12-50, p = .005) and number of activations leading to PPCI (20%, 95% CI: 11-27, p \u3c .001). A decline in STEMI activations drove the reductions in angiography and PPCI volumes. Relative to BC, the D2B times in the AC period increased on average by 20%, 95%CI (-0.2 to 44, p = .05). CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 Pandemic has adversely affected many aspects of STEMI care, including timely access to the cardiac catheterization laboratory for PPCI

Initial Findings From the North American COVID-19 Myocardial Infarction Registry

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has impacted many aspects of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) care, including timely access to primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI). The goal of the NACMI (North American COVID-19 and STEMI) registry is to describe demographic characteristics, management strategies, and outcomes of COVID-19 patients with STEMI. A prospective, ongoing observational registry was created under the guidance of 3 cardiology societies. STEMI patients with confirmed COVID+ (group 1) or suspected (person under investigation [PUI]) (group 2) COVID-19 infection were included. A group of age- and sex-matched STEMI patients (matched to COVID+ patients in a 2:1 ratio) treated in the pre-COVID era (2015 to 2019) serves as the control group for comparison of treatment strategies and outcomes (group 3). The primary outcome was a composite of in-hospital death, stroke, recurrent myocardial infarction, or repeat unplanned revascularization. As of December 6, 2020, 1,185 patients were included in the NACMI registry (230 COVID+ patients, 495 PUIs, and 460 control patients). COVID+ patients were more likely to have minority ethnicity (Hispanic 23%, Black 24%) and had a higher prevalence of diabetes mellitus (46%) (all p < 0.001 relative to PUIs). COVID+ patients were more likely to present with cardiogenic shock (18%) but were less likely to receive invasive angiography (78%) (all p < 0.001 relative to control patients). Among COVID+ patients who received angiography, 71% received PPCI and 20% received medical therapy (both p < 0.001 relative to control patients). The primary outcome occurred in 36% of COVID+ patients, 13% of PUIs, and 5% of control patients (p < 0.001 relative to control patients). COVID+ patients with STEMI represent a high-risk group of patients with unique demographic and clinical characteristics. PPCI is feasible and remains the predominant reperfusion strategy, supporting current recommendations. [Display omitted