ArticleAmerican heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice2023
Site-level variability in the processes of care and outcomes over time among patients with COVID-19 and myocardial injury: Insights from the American Heart Association's COVID-19 Cardiovascular Disease Registry.
Article in American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 9 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Elevated cardiac troponin (cTn) levels in patients with COVID-19 has been associated with worse outcomes. Guidelines on best practices of those patients remain uncertain. Methods: We included patients with COVID-19 and cTn above the assay-specific upper limit of normal (ULN) enrolled in the American Heart Association's COVID-19 registry between March 2020-January 2021. Site-level variability in invasive coronary angiography, LVEF assessment, ICU utilization, and inpatient mortality were determined by calculating adjusted median odds ratio (MOR) using hierarchical logistic regression models. Temporal trends were assessed with Cochran-Armitage trend test. Results: Among 32,636 patients, we included 6234 (19.4 %) with cTn above ULN (age 68.7 ± 16.0 years, 56.5 % male, 51.5 % Caucasian), of whom 1365 (21.6 %) had ≥5-fold elevations. Across 55 sites, the median rate of invasive coronary angiography was 0.1 % with adjusted MOR 1.5(1.0,2.3), median LVEF assessment was 25.5 %, MOR 3.0(2.2,3.9), ICU utilization was 41.7 %, MOR 2.2(1.8,2.6), and mortality was 20.9 %, MOR 1.7(1.5,2.0). Over time, we noted a significant increase in invasive coronary angiography (p-trend = 0.001), and LVEF assessment (p-trend<0.001), and reduction in mortality (p-trend<0.001), without significant change in ICU admissions (p-trend = 0.08). Similar variability and temporal trends were seen among patients with ≥5-fold cTn elevation. Conclusions: The use of invasive coronary angiography among patients with COVID-19 and myocardial injury was very low during the early pandemic. We found moderate institutional variability in processes of care with an uptrend in invasive catheterization and LVEF assessment, and downtrend in mortality. Comparative effectiveness studies are needed to examine whether variability in care is associated with differences in outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.