Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
##common.pageHeaderLogo.altText##

Research Article

Vol. 10 No. 2 (2007)

Reperfusion times for ST elevation myocardial infarction: a prospective audit

  • Kendeep S Kaila
  • Kapil M Bhagirath
  • Malek Kass
  • Lorraine Avery
  • Lillian Hall
  • Alex H Chochinov
  • James W Tam
DOI
https://doi.org/10.26443/mjm.v10i2.448
Submitted
November 1, 2020
Published
2020-12-01

Abstract

Background: New published guidelines recommend treatment of ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) within 30 minutes of first medical contact to thrombolysis and 90 minutes to primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Objectives: To determine how a tertiary care center compares to these new guidelines and to evaluate the success of measures directed to shorten delays. Methods: This was a prospectively designed audit loop using retrospective chart review. Specific time intervals were evaluated: 1) T2 (ER presentation to diagnostic EKG; 2) T ER (ER presentation to reperfusion); and 3) T AHA (first medical contact to reperfusion). Results of the initial 12-month data were conveyed to Emergency Room staff and a dedicated EKG machine was placed in the ER for the subsequent 12 months, and the results were then re-analyzed. Results: In 2003-4, 58 patients with STEMI were identified, with 41 (70.7%) receiving reperfusion. Of those receiving thrombolysis, median T AHA was 54 [37-72] minutes, with 12.0% <30 minutes, while those receiving PCI, median T AHA was 58 [43-78] minutes, with 25.0% <90 minutes. In 2004-5, 52 patients had STEMI, with 40 (76.9%) receiving reperfusion. The percentage of patients meeting the guidelines was 14.3% for the thrombolysis group and 11.1% for the PCI group. Introduction of a dedicated EKG machine led to a strong trend towards improvement in median T2 (22 vs 10 minutes; P=0.07), but other treatment times remained unchanged. Conclusions: Treatment times are longer than recommended guidelines. More comprehensive strategies and improved coordination of medical services are required to shorten pre-contact and post-contact response times.

References

  1. Tu JV, Austin PC, Filate WA, Johansen HL, Brien SE, Pilote L, Alter DA. Outcomes of acute myocardial infarction in Canada.
  2. Can J Cardiol 2003; 19(8):893-901.
  3. Guppo Italiano per lo studio della streptochinasi nell'infarcto miocardia (GISSI investigators). Effectiveness of intravenous thrombolytic treatment in acute myocardial infarction. Lancet 1986; 1:397-402.
  4. ISIS-2 (Second International Study of Infarct Survival) Collaborative Group. Randomized trial of intravenous streptokinase, oral aspirin, both, or neither among 17,187 cases of suspected acute myocardial infarction: ISIS-2. Lancet 1988; 2:349-360.
  5. The GUSTO investigators. An international randomized trial comparing four thrombolytic strategies for acute myocardial
  6. infarction. N Engl J Med 1993; 329:673-682.
  7. Fibrinolytic Therapy Trialists' (FTT) Collaborative Group. Indications for fibrinolytic therapy in suspected acute
  8. myocardial infarction: collaborative overview of early mortality and major morbidity results from all randomized trials of more than 1000 patients. Lancet 1994; 343:311-322.
  9. Grines CL, Browne KF, Marco J et al. for the Primary angioplasty in Myocardial Infarction (PAMI) Study Group. A
  10. comparison of immediate angioplasty with thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1993; 328:673-679.
  11. Anderson HR, Nielsen TT, Rasmussen K, Thuesen L, Kelbaek H, Thayssen P, et al. (DANAMI-2 Investigators). A Comparison of Coronary Angioplasty with Fibrinolytic Therapy in Acute Myocardial Infarction. N Engl J Med 2003; 349(8):733-742.
  12. Keeley EC, Boura JA, Grines CL. Primary angioplasty versus intravenous thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial
  13. infarction: a quantitative review of 23 randomized trials. Lancet 2003; 361:13-20.
  14. Nallamothu BK, Bates ER. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus Fibrinolytic Therapy in Acute Myocardial Infarction: Is Timing (Almost) Everything?. Am J Cardiol 2003; 92:824-826.
  15. Giugliano RP, Braunwald E. Selecting the Best Reperfusion Strategy in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: It's All a Matter of Time. Circulation 2003; 108:2828-30.
  16. Gersh BJ, Stone GW, White HD, Holmes DR. Pharmacological Facilitation of Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Acute Myocardial Infarction: Is the Slope of the Curve the Shape of the Future? JAMA 2005; 293:979-986.
  17. ACC/AHA Guidelines for the Management of Patients with STElevation Myocardial Infarction: Executive Summary. J Am
  18. Coll Cardiol 2004; 44:671-719.
  19. Armstrong PW, Bogarty P, Buller CE, Dorian P, O'Neill BJ. The 2004 ACC/AHA Guidelines: a perspective and adaptation for Canada by the Canadian Cardiovascular Society Working Group. Can J Cardiol 2004; 20(11):1075-9.
  20. 1999 Update: ACC/AHA Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction: Executive Summary and Recommendations. Circ 1999; 100:1016-30.
  21. Interactive Resources and On-line Material. Department of Quantitative Psychology, University of Kansas.
  22. http://www.quantpsy.org/ (August 10, 2006).
  23. Vassar Stats: Website for Statistical Computation. Richard Lowry, Vassar College. http://faculty.vassar.edu/lowry/wilcoxan.html/ (1998-2006).
  24. Bhagirath KM, Kass M, Chochinov AH, Avery L, Hall L, Tam JW. Prompt treatment of STEMI: A Race Against the Clock. Can J Cardiol 2005; 21 Supplement C: Abstract 491, 166C.
  25. Davies C, Christenson J, Campbell A, Cox JL, Huynh T, Matheson S et al. FASTRAK II Network. Fibrinolytic therapy in acute myocardial infarction: Time to treatment in Canada. Can J Cardiol 2004; 20(8):801-805.
  26. Huynh T, O'Loughlin J, Joseph L, Schampaert E, Rinfret S, Afilalo M et al. Delays to reperfusion therapy in acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: results from the AMIQuebec Study. CMAJ 2006; 175(12):1527-32.
  27. Kereiakes DJ, Weaver WD, Anderson JL, Feldman T, Gibler B, Aufderheide T et al. Time delays in the diagnosis and treatment of acute myocardial infarction: A tale of eight cities: Report from the Pre-hospital Study Group and the Cincinnati Heart Project. Am Heart J 1990; 120:773-780.
  28. De Villiers JS, Anderson T, McMeekin JD, Leung RCM, Traboulsi M. Expedited transfer for primary percutaneous
  29. coronary intervention: a program evaluation. CMAJ 2007; 176(13):1833-8.
  30. Hedges JR, Feldman HA, Bittner V, Goldberg RJ, Zapka J, Osganian SK, et al. the REACT Study Group. Impact of
  31. Community Intervention to Reduce Patient Delay Time on Use of Reperfusion Therapy for Acute Myocardial Infarction: Rapid Early Action for Coronary Treatment (REACT) Trial. Acad Emerg Med 2000; 7:862-872.
  32. Bonnefoy E, Lapostolle F, Leizorovicz A, Steg G, McFadden EP, Dubien PY et al. CAPTIM Study Group. Primary angioplasty versus prehospital fibrinolysis in acute myocardial infarction: a randomized study. Lancet 2002; 360:825-829.
  33. Armstrong PW, WEST Steering Committee. A comparison of pharmacologic therapy with/without timely coronary
  34. intervention vs. primary percutaneous intervention early after ST-elevation myocardial infarction: the WEST (Which Early
  35. ST-elevation myocardial infarction Therapy) study. European Heart Journal 2006; 27:1530-1538.
  36. Bjorklund E, Stenestrand U, Lindback J, Svensson L, Wallentin L, Lindahl B, RIKS-HIA Investigators. Pre-hospital
  37. thrombolysis delivered by paramedics is associated with reduced time delay and mortality in ambulance-transported real-life patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction. European Heart Journal 2006; 27:1146-1152.
  38. Morrison LJ, Verbeek PR, McDonald AC, Sawadsky BV, Cook DJ. Mortality and Prehospital Thrombolysis for Acute
  39. Myocardial Infarction: A Meta-analysis. JAMA 2000;283(20):2686-2692.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.