ABSTRACT Objective: To update the recommendations to support decisions regarding the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Brazil. Methods: Experts, including representatives of the Ministry of Health and methodologists, created this guideline. The method used for the rapid development of guidelines was based on the adoption and/or adaptation of existing international guidelines (GRADE ADOLOPMENT) and supported by the e-COVID-19 RecMap platform. The quality of the evidence and the preparation of the recommendations followed the GRADE method. Results: Twenty-one recommendations were generated, including strong recommendations for the use of corticosteroids in patients using supplemental oxygen and conditional recommendations for the use of tocilizumab and baricitinib for patients on supplemental oxygen or on noninvasive ventilation and anticoagulants to prevent thromboembolism. Due to suspension of use authorization, it was not possible to make recommendations regarding the use of casirivimab + imdevimab. Strong recommendations against the use of azithromycin in patients without suspected bacterial infection, hydroxychloroquine, convalescent plasma, colchicine, and lopinavir + ritonavir and conditional recommendations against the use of ivermectin and remdesivir were made. Conclusion: New recommendations for the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were generated, such as those for tocilizumab and baricitinib. Corticosteroids and prophylaxis for thromboembolism are still recommended, the latter with conditional recommendation. Several drugs were considered ineffective and should not be used to provide the best treatment according to the principles of evidence-based medicine and to promote resource economy.

RESUMO Objetivo: Atualizar as recomendações para embasar as decisões para o tratamento farmacológico de pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19 no Brasil. Métodos: A elaboração desta diretriz foi feita por especialistas, incluindo representantes do Ministério da Saúde e metodologistas. O método utilizado para o desenvolvimento rápido de diretrizes baseou-se na adoção e/ou adaptação de diretrizes internacionais existentes (GRADE ADOLOPMENT) e contou com o apoio da plataforma e-COVID-19 RecMap. A qualidade das evidências e a elaboração das recomendações seguiram o método GRADE. Resultados: Chegaram-se a 21 recomendações, incluindo recomendações fortes quanto ao uso de corticosteroides em pacientes em uso de oxigênio suplementar e recomendações condicionais para o uso de tocilizumabe e baricitinibe, em pacientes com oxigênio suplementar ou ventilação não invasiva, e de anticoagulantes, para prevenção de tromboembolismo. Devido à suspensão da autorização de uso, não foi possível fazer recomendações para o tratamento com casirivimabe + imdevimabe. Foram feitas recomendações fortes contra o uso de azitromicina em pacientes sem suspeita de infecção bacteriana, hidroxicloroquina, plasma convalescente, colchicina e lopinavir + ritonavir, além de recomendações condicionais contra o uso de ivermectina e rendesivir. Conclusão: Foram criadas novas recomendações para o tratamento de pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19, como as recomendações de tocilizumabe e baricitinibe. Ainda são recomendados corticosteroides e profilaxia contra tromboembolismo, esta em caráter condicional. Vários medicamentos foram considerados ineficazes e não devem ser usados, no intuito de proporcionar o melhor tratamento segundo os princípios da medicina baseada em evidências e promover a economia de recursos.

ABSTRACT Objective The incidence of thrombotic events and acute kidney injury is high in critically ill patients with COVID-19. We aimed to evaluate and compare the coagulation profiles of patients with COVID-19 developing acute kidney injury versus those who did not, during their intensive care unit stay. Methods Conventional coagulation and platelet function tests, fibrinolysis, endogenous inhibitors of coagulation tests, and rotational thromboelastometry were conducted on days 0, 1, 3, 7, and 14 following intensive care unit admission. Results Out of 30 patients included, 13 (43.4%) met the criteria for acute kidney injury. Comparing both groups, patients with acute kidney injury were older: 73 (60-84) versus 54 (47-64) years, p=0.027, and had a lower baseline glomerular filtration rate: 70 (51-81) versus 93 (83-106) mL/min/1.73m2, p=0.004. On day 1, D-dimer and fibrinogen levels were elevated but similar between groups: 1780 (1319-5517) versus 1794 (726-2324) ng/mL, p=0.145 and 608 (550-700) versus 642 (469-722) g/dL, p=0.95, respectively. Rotational thromboelastometry data were also similar between groups. However, antithrombin activity and protein C levels were lower in patients who developed acute kidney injury: 82 (75-92) versus 98 (90-116), p=0.028 and 70 (52-82) versus 88 (78-101) µ/mL, p=0.038, respectively. Mean protein C levels were lower in the group with acute kidney injury across multiple time points during their stay in the intensive care unit. Conclusion Critically ill patients experiencing acute kidney injury exhibited lower endogenous anticoagulant levels. Further studies are needed to understand the role of natural anticoagulants in the pathophysiology of acute kidney injury within this population.

RESUMO Objetivo: Avaliar as práticas clínicas e a organização dos recursos hospitalares durante o início da pandemia da COVID-19 no Brasil. Metódos: Foi realizado um estudo transversal multicêntrico. Um questionário on-line foi disponibilizado a médicos dos serviços de emergência e das unidades de terapia intensiva que atendiam pacientes com COVID-19. O questionário contemplava quatro aspectos: perfil dos participantes, práticas clínicas, protocolos de tratamento da COVID-19 e organização dos recursos hospitalares. Resultados: Entre maio e junho de 2020, 284 participantes (56,3% homens), com idade mediana de 39 (intervalo interquartil de 33 - 47), responderam ao questionário; 33% eram intensivistas e 9% eram especialistas em medicina de emergência. Metade dos respondentes trabalhava em hospitais públicos. Verificou-se que a ventilação não invasiva (89% versus 73%; p = 0,001) e a cânula nasal de alto fluxo (49% versus 32%; p = 0,005) encontravam-se mais frequentemente disponíveis em hospitais privados do que nos públicos. A ventilação mecânica foi mais frequentemente utilizada em hospitais públicos do que em privados (70% versus 50%; p = 0,024). Nos serviços de emergência, a pressão positiva expiratória final foi mais frequentemente ajustada de acordo com a saturação de oxigênio, enquanto nas unidades de terapia intensiva, a pressão positiva expiratória final foi ajustada de acordo com a melhor complacência pulmonar. Nos serviços de emergência, 25% dos respondentes não sabiam como ajustar a pressão positiva expiratória final. Comparativamente aos hospitais privados, os hospitais públicos tiveram menor disponibilidade de protocolos para Equipamentos de Proteção Individual durante a intubação traqueal (82% versus 94%; p = 0,005), o manejo da ventilação mecânica (64% versus 75%; p = 0,006) e o desmame dos pacientes da ventilação mecânica (34% versus 54%; p = 0,002). Finalmente, os pacientes passaram menos tempo no serviço de emergência antes de serem transferidos à unidade de terapia intensiva em hospitais privados do que em hospitais públicos (idade mediana de 2 (1 - 3) versus idade mediana de 5 (2 - 24) horas; p < 0,001). Conclusão: Este estudo revelou heterogeneidade considerável entre os médicos em termos de organização dos recursos hospitalares, práticas clínicas e tratamentos durante o início da pandemia da COVID-19 no Brasil.

ABSTRACT Objective: To evaluate clinical practices and hospital resource organization during the early COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil. Methods: This was a multicenter, cross-sectional survey. An electronic questionnaire was provided to emergency department and intensive care unit physicians attending COVID-19 patients. The survey comprised four domains: characteristics of the participants, clinical practices, COVID-19 treatment protocols and hospital resource organization. Results: Between May and June 2020, 284 participants [median (interquartile ranges) age 39 (33 - 47) years, 56.3% men] responded to the survey; 33% were intensivists, and 9% were emergency medicine specialists. Half of the respondents worked in public hospitals. Noninvasive ventilation (89% versus 73%; p = 0.001) and highflow nasal cannula (49% versus 32%; p = 0.005) were reported to be more commonly available in private hospitals than in public hospitals. Mechanical ventilation was more commonly used in public hospitals than private hospitals (70% versus 50%; p = 0,024). In the Emergency Departments, positive endexpiratory pressure was most commonly adjusted according to SpO2, while in the intensive care units, positive end-expiratory pressure was adjusted according to the best lung compliance. In the Emergency Departments, 25% of the respondents did not know how to set positive end-expiratory pressure. Compared to private hospitals, public hospitals had a lower availability of protocols for personal protection equipment during tracheal intubation (82% versus 94%; p = 0.005), managing mechanical ventilation [64% versus 75%; p = 0.006] and weaning patients from mechanical ventilation [34% versus 54%; p = 0.002]. Finally, patients spent less time in the emergency department before being transferred to the intensive care unit in private hospitals than in public hospitals [2 (1 - 3) versus 5 (2 - 24) hours; p < 0.001]. Conclusion: This survey revealed significant heterogeneity in the organization of hospital resources, clinical practices and treatments among physicians during the early COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil.

RESUMO Objetivos: Há diversas terapias sendo utilizadas ou propostas para a COVID-19, muitas carecendo de apropriada avaliação de efetividade e segurança. O propósito deste documento é elaborar recomendações para subsidiar decisões sobre o tratamento farmacológico de pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19 no Brasil. Métodos: Um grupo de 27 membros, formado por especialistas, representantes do Ministério da Saúde e metodologistas, integra essa diretriz. Foi utilizado o método de elaboração de diretrizes rápidas, tomando por base a adoção e/ou a adaptação de recomendações a partir de diretrizes internacionais existentes (GRADE ADOLOPMENT), apoiadas pela plataforma e-COVID-19 RecMap. A qualidade das evidências e a elaboração das recomendações seguiram o método GRADE. Resultados: Foram geradas 16 recomendações. Entre elas, estão recomendações fortes para o uso de corticosteroides em pacientes em uso de oxigênio suplementar, para o uso de anticoagulantes em doses de profilaxia para tromboembolismo e para não uso de antibacterianos nos pacientes sem suspeita de infecção bacteriana. Não foi possível fazer uma recomendação quanto à utilização do tocilizumabe em pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19 em uso de oxigênio, pelas incertezas na disponibilidade e de acesso ao medicamento. Foi feita recomendação para não usar azitromicina, casirivimabe + imdevimabe, cloroquina, colchicina, hidroxicloroquina, ivermectina, lopinavir/ ritonavir, plasma convalescente e rendesivir. Conclusão: Até o momento, poucas terapias se provaram efetivas no tratamento do paciente hospitalizado com COVID-19, sendo recomendados apenas corticosteroides e profilaxia para tromboembolismo. Diversos medicamentos foram considerados ineficazes, devendo ser descartados, de forma a oferecer o melhor tratamento pelos princípios da medicina baseada em evidências e promover economia de recursos não eficazes.

ABSTRACT Objective: Several therapies are being used or proposed for COVID-19, and many lack appropriate evaluations of their effectiveness and safety. The purpose of this document is to develop recommendations to support decisions regarding the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Brazil. Methods: A group of 27 experts, including representatives of the Ministry of Health and methodologists, created this guideline. The method used for the rapid development of guidelines was based on the adoption and/or adaptation of existing international guidelines (GRADE ADOLOPMENT) and supported by the e-COVID-19 RecMap platform. The quality of the evidence and the preparation of the recommendations followed the GRADE method. Results: Sixteen recommendations were generated. They include strong recommendations for the use of corticosteroids in patients using supplemental oxygen, the use of anticoagulants at prophylactic doses to prevent thromboembolism and the nonuse of antibiotics in patients without suspected bacterial infection. It was not possible to make a recommendation regarding the use of tocilizumab in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 using oxygen due to uncertainties regarding the availability of and access to the drug. Strong recommendations against the use of hydroxychloroquine, convalescent plasma, colchicine, lopinavir + ritonavir and antibiotics in patients without suspected bacterial infection and also conditional recommendations against the use of casirivimab + imdevimab, ivermectin and rendesivir were made. Conclusion: To date, few therapies have proven effective in the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19, and only corticosteroids and prophylaxis for thromboembolism are recommended. Several drugs were considered ineffective and should not be used to provide the best treatment according to the principles of evidence-based medicine and promote economical resource use.

ABSTRACT Background Several therapies have been used or proposed for the treatment of COVID-19, although their effectiveness and safety have not been properly evaluated. The purpose of this document is to provide recommendations to support decisions about the drug treatment of outpatients with COVID-19 in Brazil. Methods A panel consisting of experts from different clinical fields, representatives of the Brazilian Ministry of Health, and methodologists (37 members in total) was responsible for preparing these guidelines. A rapid guideline development method was used, based on the adoption and/or adaptation of recommendations from existing international guidelines combined with additional structured searches for primary studies and new recommendations whenever necessary (GRADE-ADOLOPMENT). The rating of quality of evidence and the drafting of recommendations followed the GRADE method. Results Ten technologies were evaluated, and 10 recommendations were prepared. Recommendations were made against the use of anticoagulants, azithromycin, budesonide, colchicine, corticosteroids, hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine alone or combined with azithromycin, ivermectin, nitazoxanide, and convalescent plasma. It was not possible to make a recommendation regarding the use of monoclonal antibodies in outpatients, as their benefit is uncertain and their cost is high, with limitations of availability and implementation. Conclusion To date, few therapies have demonstrated effectiveness in the treatment of outpatients with COVID-19. Recommendations are restricted to what should not be used, in order to provide the best treatment according to the principles of evidence-based medicine and to promote resource savings by aboiding ineffective treatments.

Resumo A atenção ao paciente vítima de parada cardiorrespiratória no contexto da pandemia da Doença por Coronavírus 2019 (COVID-19) possui particularidades que devem ser ressaltadas. As seguintes recomendações da Associação Brasileira de Medicina de Emergência (ABRAMEDE), Sociedade Brasileira de Cardiologia (SBC), Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira (AMIB) e Sociedade Brasileira de Anestesiologia (SBA), representantes oficiais de especialidades afiliadas à Associação Médica Brasileira (AMB), têm por objetivo orientar as diversas equipes assistentes, em uma situação de poucas evidências sólidas, maximizando a proteção das equipes e dos pacientes. É fundamental a paramentação completa com Equipamentos de Proteção Individual para aerossóis durante o atendimento de parada cardiorrespiratória. Também se faz imperativo que se considerem e tratem as potenciais causas nesses pacientes, principalmente hipóxia e arritmias de correntes de QT longo ou miocardite. A instalação de via aérea invasiva avançada deve ser obtida precocemente, e o uso de filtros HEPA na interface com a bolsa-válvula é obrigatório. Situações de ocorrência de parada cardiorrespiratória durante a ventilação mecânica e em posição pronada demandam peculiaridades de ajustes do ventilador e posicionamento de compressões torácicas distintas do padrão de ressuscitação cardiopulmonar. Dadas essas particularidades logísticas, o atendimento segue de acordo com os protocolos e diretrizes nacionais e internacionais do International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) de 2015, das diretrizes da American Heart Association (AHA) de 2019 e da Atualização da Diretriz de Ressuscitação Cardiopulmonar e Cuidados de Emergência da Sociedade Brasileira de Cardiologia de 2019.

Abstract Care for patients with cardiac arrest in the context of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has several unique aspects that warrant particular attention. This joint position statement by the Brazilian Association of Emergency Medicine (ABRAMEDE), Brazilian Society of Cardiology (SBC), Brazilian Association of Intensive Care Medicine (AMIB), and Brazilian Society of Anesthesiology (SBA), all official societies representing the corresponding medical specialties affiliated with the Brazilian Medical Association (AMB), provides recommendations to guide health care workers in the current context of limited robust evidence, aiming to maximize the protection of staff and patients alike. It is essential that full aerosol precautions, which include wearing appropriate personal protective equipment, be followed during resuscitation. It is also imperative that potential causes of cardiac arrest of particular interest in this patient population, especially hypoxia, cardiac arrhythmias associated with QT prolongation, and myocarditis, be considered and addressed. An advanced invasive airway device should be placed early. Use of HEPA filters at the bag-valve interface is mandatory. Management of cardiac arrest occurring during mechanical ventilation or during prone positioning demands particular ventilator settings and rescuer positioning for chest compressions which deviate from standard cardiopulmonary resuscitation techniques. Apart from these logistical issues, care should otherwise follow national and international protocols and guidelines, namely the 2015 International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) and 2019 American Heart Association (AHA) guidelines and the 2019 Update to the Brazilian Society of Cardiology Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Guideline.

RESUMO Em dezembro de 2019, uma série de pacientes com pneumonia grave foi identificada em Wuhan, província de Hubei, na China. Esses pacientes evoluíram para síndrome respiratória aguda grave e síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo. Posteriormente, a COVID-19 foi atribuída a um novo betacoronavírus, o coronavírus da síndrome respiratória aguda grave 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Cerca de 20% dos pacientes com diagnóstico de COVID-19 desenvolvem formas graves da doença, incluindo insuficiência respiratória aguda hipoxêmica, síndrome respiratória aguda grave, síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo e insuficiência renal aguda e requerem admissão em unidade de terapia intensiva. Não há nenhum ensaio clínico randomizado controlado que avalie potenciais tratamentos para pacientes com infecção confirmada pela COVID-19 no momento da publicação destas recomendações de tratamento. Dessa forma, essas recomendações são baseadas predominantemente na opinião de especialistas (grau de recomendação de nível C).

ABSTRACT In December 2019, a series of patients with severe pneumonia were identified in Wuhan, Hubei province, China, who progressed to severe acute respiratory syndrome and acute respiratory distress syndrome. Subsequently, COVID-19 was attributed to a new betacoronavirus, the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Approximately 20% of patients diagnosed as COVID-19 develop severe forms of the disease, including acute hypoxemic respiratory failure, severe acute respiratory syndrome, acute respiratory distress syndrome and acute renal failure and require intensive care. There is no randomized controlled clinical trial addressing potential therapies for patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection at the time of publishing these treatment recommendations. Therefore, these recommendations are based predominantly on the opinion of experts (level C of recommendation).

RESUMO O presente relato de experiência tem como objetivo descrever a concepção e os dados preliminares da implementação de um programa de telerrastreio e telemonitoramento da covid-19 para usuários do Sistema Único de Saúde com condições de risco para agravamento. Foi implantado um sistema de telerrastreio por meio do qual estudantes de graduação na área da saúde contactam os pacientes via telefone, conforme periodicidade e critérios predefinidos, para monitorar a evolução do quadro. Em oito semanas, foram realizadas 2.190 tentativas de contato remoto com indivíduos de cinco unidades de saúde. O número efetivo de indivíduos monitorados no momento da escrita deste artigo é de 802.

ABSTRACT This case report aims to describe the conception and preliminary data of the implementation of a telescreening and telemonitoring program of covid-19 for users of the Unified Health System with risk conditions. A system of telerscreening was implemented through which undergraduate students in the health area contact patients by telephone, according to periodicity and predefined criteria, to monitor the evolution of the condition. In eight weeks, 2,190 attempts at remote contact were made with individuals from five health units. The effective number of individuals monitored at the time this writing is 802.

RESUMO O presente relato de experiência tem como objetivo descrever a concepção e os dados preliminares da implementação de um programa de telerrastreio e telemonitoramento da covid-19 para usuários do Sistema Único de Saúde com condições de risco para agravamento. Foi implantado um sistema de telerrastreio por meio do qual estudantes de graduação na área da saúde contactam os pacientes via telefone, conforme periodicidade e critérios predefinidos, para monitorar a evolução do quadro. Em oito semanas, foram realizadas 2.190 tentativas de contato remoto com indivíduos de cinco unidades de saúde. O número efetivo de indivíduos monitorados no momento da escrita deste artigo é de 802.

ABSTRACT This case report aims to describe the conception and preliminary data of the implementation of a telescreening and telemonitoring program of covid-19 for users of the Unified Health System with risk conditions. A system of telerscreening was implemented through which undergraduate students in the health area contact patients by telephone, according to periodicity and predefined criteria, to monitor the evolution of the condition. In eight weeks, 2,190 attempts at remote contact were made with individuals from five health units. The effective number of individuals monitored at the time this writing is 802.

Abstract Purpose: To evaluate severity and built a pilot of a national databank about pediatric trauma and to determine its severity. Methods: Prospective study of unintentional pediatric trauma in five hospitals in the city of São Paulo, Brazil. Results: 916 patients in 4 months. 61.5% of traumatized children were male, average 6.5 years. 48. 4% were falls. Most families had an average monthly income less than three minimum wages. 42% of accidents occurred at home. 18.9% of children were alone. 59,8% of parents thought it could be prevented. 26.5% of children had previous accidents. GCS was severe: 5 patients, moderate: 8 patients. 21 patients were intubated (2.4%), RTS <7 in 10.2%, PTS<8 in 3.6%. 8.5% patients were considered severe, which was related to falls (p=0.001); sports (p=0.045); pedestrian (p=0.006); child education (p=0.015) and cared by male (p=0.007). Conclusions: Severity occurred in 8.5% and was associated to falls, sports, traffic, child education, and cared by male. Simple preventive measures could have prevented most of the accidents. The tested tool for details was successful and can be used throughout the country.

FUNDAMENTO: O Brasil carece de registros multicêntricos publicados de síndrome coronariana aguda. OBJETIVO: O Registro Brasileiro de Síndrome Coronariana Aguda é um estudo multicêntrico nacional com objetivo de apresentar dados representativos das características clínicas, e manejo e evolução hospitalares dessa síndrome. MÉTODOS: Participaram 23 hospitais de 14 cidades. Foram elegíveis pacientes que se apresentaram com suspeita de síndrome coronariana aguda nas primeiras 24 horas, com quadro clínico sugestivo, associado a alterações eletrocardiográficas compatíveis e/ou marcadores de necrose. O seguimento foi realizado até o óbito ou a alta hospitalar. RESULTADOS: Entre os anos de 2003 e 2008, foram incluídos 2.693 pacientes com diagnóstico de síndrome coronariana aguda, sendo 864 (32,1%) mulheres. O diagnóstico final foi de angina instável para 1.141 (42,4%) pacientes, com mortalidade de 3,06% deles; de infarto agudo do miocárdio sem supradesnível de ST para 529 (19,6%) pacientes, com mortalidade de 6,8% deles; e de infarto agudo do miocárdio com supradesnível de ST para 950 (35,3%) pacientes, com mortalidade de 8,1% deles; tiveram diagnóstico não confirmado 73 (2,7%) pacientes, com mortalidade de 1,36% deles. A mortalidade global foi de 5,53%. O modelo de regressão logística múltipla identificou o gênero feminino (OR=1,45), o diabetes melito (OR=1,59), o índice de massa corporal (OR=1,27) e a intervenção coronariana percutânea (OR=0,70) como fatores de risco de óbito, para demografia e intervenções. Um modelo para óbito por complicações maiores identificou choque cardiogênico/Edema Agudo de Pulmão (OR=4,57), reinfarto (OR=3,48), acidente vascular cerebral (OR=21,56), sangramento grave (OR=3,33), parada cardiorrespiratória (OR=40,27) e classe funcional de Killip (OR=3,37). CONCLUSÃO: Os dados do Registro Brasileiro de Síndrome Coronariana Aguda não diferem de outros coletados fora do país. Seus achados poderão ajudar a promover um melhor planejamento e manejo do atendimento da síndrome coronariana aguda a nível público e privado.

BACKGROUND: Brazil lacks published multicenter registries of acute coronary syndrome. OBJECTIVE: The Brazilian Registry of Acute Coronary Syndrome is a multicenter national study aiming at providing data on clinical aspects, management and hospital outcomes of acute coronary syndrome in our country. METHODS: A total of 23 hospitals from 14 cities, participated in this study. Eligible patients were those who came to the emergency wards with suspected acute coronary syndrome within the first 24 hours of symptom onset, associated with compatible electrocardiographic alterations and/or altered necrosis biomarkers. Follow-up lasted until hospital discharge or death, whichever occurred first. RESULTS: Between 2003 and 2008, 2,693 ACS patients were enrolled, of which 864 (32.1%) were females. T he final diagnosis was unstable angina in 1,141 patients, (42.4%), with a mortality rate of 3.06%, non-ST elevation acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in 529 (19.6%), with mortality of 6.8%, ST-elevation AMI 950 (35.3%), with mortality of 8.1% and non-confirmed diagnosis 73 (2.7%), with mortality of 1.36%. The overall mortality was 5.53%. The multiple logistic regression model identified the following as risk factors for death regarding demographic factors and interventions: female gender (OR=1.45), diabetes mellitus (OR=1.59), body mass index (OR=1.27) and percutaneous coronary intervention (OR=0.70). A second model for death due to major complications identified: cardiogenic shock/acute pulmonary edema (OR=4.57), reinfarction (OR=3.48), stroke (OR=21.56), major bleeding (OR=3.33), cardiopulmonary arrest (OR=40.27) and Killip functional class (OR=3.37). CONCLUSION: The Brazilian Registry of Acute Coronary Syndrome data do not differ from other data collected abroad. The understanding of their findings may help promote better planning and management of acute coronary syndrome care in public and private health services.