Introduction: This study aims to evaluate the effect of primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and thrombolytic therapy (TT) on the in-hospital adverse events, in-hospital and long-term mortality in patients over 65 years of age with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).Material and methods: A total of 111 retrospectively screened patients (73 males, mean age: 73.4 ±5.9 years) over 65 years of age with STEMI, who underwent TT or primary PCI, were included in the study. Patients’ characteristics, in-hospital outcomes, and 6-month and 1-year mortalities were recorded.Results: Our study was conducted with 111 patients over 65 years of age with STEMI (73 males, 38 females). Of the patients, 66 (59.5%) were treated with thrombolytics, and 45 (40.5%) patients underwent primary PCI. Door-to-needle time was 25.9 ±7.8 min in the TT group, whereas door-to-balloon time was 84.4 ±20.0 min in the PCI group. Time from symptom onset to hospital admission was 213.6 ±158.4 min in the thrombolytic group, and 166.8 ±112.8 min in the PCI group. Rescue PCI was performed in 7 (10.6%) patients in the TT group due to lack of reperfusion. Recurrent infarction was observed in 5 (7.6%) patients in the TT group and in 2 (4.4%) patients in the PCI group. Non-haemorrhagic stroke was observed in 1 (1.5%) patient in the thrombolytic-administered group and in 4 (8.9%) patients in the PCI group. No intracranial haemorrhage was observed in any patient. Major haemorrhage was observed in 4 (6.1%) patients in the TT group and in 4 (8.9%) patients in the PCI group. Six-month and 1-year mortalities were present in 15 (22.7%) patients and 19 patients in thrombolytic group, and 8 (17.8%) and 8 (17.8%) patients in the PCI group, respectively. Binary logistic regression analysis indicated that the patient’s age was the only predictor for 1-year mortality (odds ratio (OR) = 1.1, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.019–1.188, p = 0.015).Conclusions: Considering the in-hospital adverse outcomes, in-hospital mortality, and 6-month mortality rates, TT and primary PCI have similar effects in STEMI patients aged 65 years and over according to the results of our study. Although 1-year mortality was higher in the TT group, it was not statistically significant.

SUMMARY OBJECTIVE Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an emerging health threat caused by a novel coronavirus named severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-COV-2). Previous studies have noted hypertension is associated with increased mortality due to COVID-19; however, it is not clear whether the increased risk is due to hypertension itself or antihypertensive agents. We aimed to evaluate the impact of antihypertensive agents on the clinical outcomes of hypertensive patients with COVID-19. METHODS Our study included 169 consecutive hypertensive patients hospitalized due to COVID-19 between March 20 and April 10, 2020. The demographic characteristics, clinical data, and type of antihypertensive agents being used were reviewed. RESULTS The mean age of patients was 65.8±11.7 years.30 patients(17.7%) died during hospitalization. A total of 142 patients(84%) were using angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs), 91 (53.8%) were using diuretics, 69 (40.8%) were using calcium channel blockers (CCBs), 66 (39.1%) were using beta-blockers, 12 (7.1%) were using alpha-blockers, and 5 (2.9%) were using mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs). There was no significant difference between survivors and non-survivors based on the type of antihypertensive agents being used. Binary logistic regression analysis showed that the type of the antihypertensive agent being used had no effect on mortality [OR=0.527 (0.130-2.138), p=0.370 for ACEIs/ARBs; OR=0.731 (0.296-1.808), p=0.498 for CCBs; OR=0.673 (0.254-1.782), p=0.425 for diuretics; OR=1.846 (0.688-4.950), p=0.223 for beta-blockers; OR=0.389 (0.089-1.695), p=0.208 for alpha-blockers; and OR=1.372 (0.107-17.639), p=0.808 for MRAs]. CONCLUSION The type of antihypertensive agent being used had no effect on the clinical course and mortality in hypertensive patients with COVID-19. The use of these agents should be maintained for the treatment of hypertension during hospitalization.

Rivaroxaban is an oral anticoagulant agent that directly inhibits Factor Xa and interrupts both the intrinsic and extrinsic pathway of the coagulation cascade and is currently indicated for use in patients for atrial fibrillation and prophylaxis of deep venous thrombosis. The present case reports of spontaneous rectus sheath hematoma during rivaroxaban therapy for atrial fibrillation in a 75-year-old woman.

There are limited data on the arterial stiffness changes after severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. The present study evaluated the changes in arterial stiffness in completely healthy patients who had a SARS-CoV-2 infection using the cardio‐ankle vascular index (CAVI). The study included 70 patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection between December 2020 and June 2021. A cardiac evaluation was carried out, including chest X-ray, electrocardiography (ECG), and echocardiography in all patients. Within the 1st month and 7th month CAVI was measured. Mean age was 37.8 ± 10.0 years, and 41/70 were female. Mean height was 168.6 ± 9.5 cm, mean weight 73.2 ± 15.1 kg, and mean body mass index (BMI) of the group was 25.6 ± 4.2, respectively. CAVI results from the right arm were 6.45 ± .95 at 1-month follow-up and 6.68 ± 1.05 at 7 months follow-up (P = .016) and from the left arm were 6.43 ± 1.0 at 1-month follow-up, 6.70 ± 1.05 at 7-month follow-up (P = .005). Our results showed an ongoing injury in the arterial system after healthy SARS-COV-2 patients during 7 months, as represented by CAVI measurements.

As heart failure (HF) is a growing epidemic, no case should be overlooked in the diagnosis of HF. Two subtypes by left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of HF are HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) (LVEF ≤ 40%) and HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) (LVEF ≥ 50%). HFrEF is easier to diagnose. However, the diagnosis of HFpEF is more complex and difficult even for specialists. The diagnosis of HFpEF is a problem that is being tried to be solved in medicine. Since LVEF appears normal (LVEF ≥ 50% in healthy individuals), HFpEF can be confused with chest diseases due to some similar symptoms. The diagnosis of HF subtypes is ideally made using echocardiography. Echocardiography should be performed in all patients with HF; however, it is expensive and requires specialists. Even in high-resource regions, this test is not always performed, and treatment may need to be initiated before the echocardiographic data are obtained. For such situations, economical and practical systems are required. In this study, a medical decision support system was developed to detect HFrEF and HFpEF cases using only 3-lead ECG. From the ECG data of 61 volunteers, 37 features were extracted, of which 16 were Yule-Walker and Burg’s method parameters, and 21 were in the time domain. Consequently, 37 features were reduced by feature selection and triple classification was performed with only 4 features with maximum accuracy. The aim of this study was to determine whether the individuals with HF symptoms were HFrEF, HFpEF, or healthy. Four machine learning algorithms were used for classification. The best classification accuracy rate was 100% for k-NN, and significant results were obtained from the other three algorithms: SVMs, Decision Trees, and Ensemble Bagged Trees.

Aim: We sought to determine the relationship between presence of atrial fibrillation (AF) and serum biomarkers, including native thiol (antioxidant), disulphide/native thiol ratio, Hs-CRP and high-...