Delay In Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Research Articles

Rationale and design of the OPTIMAL-REPERFUSION trial: A prospective randomized multi-center clinical trial comparing different fibrinolysis-transfer percutaneous coronary intervention strategies in acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.

Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI), the preferred reperfusion strategy for all acute ST‐segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients, is not universally available in clinical practice. Pharmacoinvasive strategy has been proposed as a therapeutic option in patients with STEMI when timely PPCI is not feasible. However, pharmacoinvasive strategy has potential delay between clinical patency and complete myocardial perfusion. The optimal reperfusion strategy for STEMI patients with anticipated PPCI delay according to current practice is uncertain. OPTIMAL‐REPERFUSION is an investigator‐initiated, prospective, multicenter, randomized, open‐label, superiority trial with blinded evaluation of outcomes. A total of 632 STEMI patients presenting within 6 hours after symptom onset and with an expected time of first medical contact to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) ≥120 minute will be randomized to a reduced‐dose facilitated PCI strategy (reduced‐dose fibrinolysis combined with simultaneous transfer for immediate invasive therapy with a time interval between fibrinolysis to PCI < 3 hours) or to standard pharmacoinvasive treatment. The primary endpoint is the composite of death, reinfarction, refractory ischemia, congestive heart failure, or cardiogenic shock at 30‐days. Enrollment of the first patient is planned in March 2021. The recruitment is anticipated to last for 12 to 18 months and to complete in September 2023 with 1 year follow‐up. The OPTIMAL‐REPERFUSION trial will help determine whether reduced‐dose facilitated PCI strategy improves clinical outcomes in patients with STEMI and anticipated PPCI delay. This study is registered with the ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04752345).

Reperfusion of ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction in the COVID-19 Era: Business as Usual?

Reperfusion of ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction in the COVID-19 Era: Business as Usual?

Improving Care of STEMI in the United States 2008 to 2012.

BackgroundWe aimed to determine the change in treatment strategies and times to treatment over the first 5 years of the Mission: Lifeline program.Methods and ResultsWe assessed pre‐ and in‐hospital care and outcomes from 2008 to 2012 for patients with ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction at US hospitals, using data from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network Registry—Get With The Guidelines Registry. In‐hospital adjusted mortality was calculated including and excluding cardiac arrest as a reason for primary percutaneous coronary intervention delay. A total of 147 466 patients from 485 hospitals were analyzed. There was a decrease in the proportion of eligible patients not treated with reperfusion (6.2% versus 3.3%) and treated with fibrinolytic therapy (13.4% versus 7.0%). Median time from symptom onset to first medical contact was unchanged (≈50 minutes). Use of prehospital ECGs increased (45% versus 71%). All major reperfusion times improved: median first medical contact‐to‐device for emergency medical systems transport to percutaneous coronary intervention–capable hospitals (93 to 84 minutes), first door‐to‐device for transfers for primary percutaneous coronary intervention (130 to 112 minutes), and door‐in–door‐out at non–percutaneous coronary intervention–capable hospitals (76 to 62 minutes) (all P<0.001 over 5 years). Rates of cardiogenic shock and cardiac arrest, and overall in‐hospital mortality increased (5.7% to 6.3%). Adjusted mortality excluding patients with known cardiac arrest decreased by 14% at 3 years and 25% at 5 years (P<0.001).ConclusionsQuality of care for patients with ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction improved over time in Mission: Lifeline, including increased use of reperfusion therapy and faster times‐to‐treatment. In‐hospital mortality improved for patients without cardiac arrest but did not appear to improve overall as the number of these high‐risk patients increased.

STEMI or non-STEMI: that is the question.

Acute coronary syndromes are usually classified on the basis of the presence or absence of ST elevation on the ECG: ST-elevation myocardial infarction or non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI)patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) need immediate therapy, without unnecessary delay and primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) should preferably be performed within 90 min after first medical contact. However, in AMI patients without ST-segment elevation (pre) hospital triage for immediate transfer to the catheterisation laboratory may be difficult. Moreover, initial diagnosis and risk stratification take place at busy emergency departments and chest pain units with additional risk of ‘PPCI delay’. Optimal timing of angiography and revascularisation remains a challenge. We describe a patient with NSTEMI who was scheduled for early coronary angiography within 24 h but retrospectively should have been sent to the cath lab immediately because he had a significant amount of myocardium at risk, undetected by non-invasive parameters.

Effect of Radial-to-Femoral Access Crossover on Adverse Outcomes in Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

We aimed to describe the impact of the vascular access used when patients are treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) and to assess whether this translates into differences in angiographic outcomes. Patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction who underwent PPCI were divided into 3 groups: successful radial access (RA), successful femoral access (FA), and Crossover (failed RA with need for bailout FA) groups. Vascular access-related time (VART) was defined as the delay in PPCI that can be attributed to vascular access-related issues. Study end point was the final corrected Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction frame count. Multivariable analysis was used to identify predictors of RA failure (RAF: FA + Crossover). We included 241 patients (RA, n = 172; FA, n = 49; Crossover, n = 20). Mean VART was longer in Crossover (10.3 [8.8 to 12.4] minutes), relative to RA (4.1 [3.2 to 5.5] minutes) and FA (4.6 [3.4 to 8.4] minutes, p <0.001). A similar situation was found for time-to-first device (Crossover 22.5 [20.3 to 32.0], RA 15.0 [12.0 to 19.8]; FA 17.9 [13.5 to 22.3] minutes, p <0.001) and total procedure time (Crossover 60.3 [51.6 to 71.5], RA 46.8 [38.1 to 59.7], FA 52.3 [41.9 to 74.7] minutes, p <0.001). No differences in corrected Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction frame count were observed (Crossover 26 [18 to 32] frames, RA 24 [18 to 32] frames, FA 25 [16 to 34] frames, p = 0.625). Killip class IV (odds ratio [OR] 3.628, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.098 to 11.981, p = 0.035), cardiopulmonary resuscitation before arrival (OR 3.572, 95% CI 1.028 to 12.407, p = 0.045), and glomerular filtration rate (OR 0.861, 95% CI 0.758 to 0.978, p = 0.021) were independent predictors of RA failure. In conclusion, in the setting of PPCI, radial-to-FA crossover can lead to VART delays that do not affect angiographic outcomes, in comparison with successful RA.

Impact of 24‐hr in‐hospital interventional cardiology team on timeliness of reperfusion for ST‐segment elevation myocardial infarction

We studied the effect of 24 hr a day, 7 days a week interventional cardiology staff on door-to-balloon (D2B) time and mortality in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Any delay in PPCI in acute STEMI is associated with higher mortality and, therefore, time to treatment should be as short as possible. Despite the use of several strategies, goal D2B time of <90 min remains elusive. The study examined 790 consecutive STEMI patients treated with PPCI as the reperfusion therapy of choice. Patients were grouped into a pre-24 x 7 and post-24 x 7 cohort to study the impact of the new protocol on D2B time and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and mortality. Median D2B time decreased from 99 min in the pre-24 x 7 group to 55 min in the post-24 x 7 group (P = 0.001) and was not influenced by time of day or day of week. Adjusted for patient and clinical characteristics, the pre-24 x 7 group had increased in-hospital cardiovascular mortality (odds ratio 1.94, 95% confidence interval 0.95-3.94; P = 0.048) and MACE (odds ratio 1.66, 95% confidence interval 1.10-2.49; P = 0.009) compared with the post-24 x 7 group. Prolonged D2B time was also associated with higher 1-year overall mortality in the pre-24 x 7 group compared with the post-24 x 7 group (12.8% vs. 8.1%; hazard ratio 1.17, 95% confidence interval 1.04-2.66; P = 0.044). Round-the-clock, in-hospital interventional cardiology team consistently and significantly reduces D2B time, in-hospital cardiovascular mortality, MACE, and 1-year mortality in patients with STEMI.