Literature DB >> 30236355

Delays in Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Patients Presenting With Cardiogenic Shock.

Ajar Kochar1, Hussein R Al-Khalidi2, Steen M Hansen2, Jay S Shavadia2, Mayme L Roettig2, Christopher B Fordyce3, Shannon Doerfler2, Bernard J Gersh4, Timothy D Henry5, Peter B Berger6, James G Jollis2, Christopher B Granger2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to examine whether quality improvement initiatives across multiple ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) systems translated to faster first medical contact (FMC)-to-device times for patients presenting with cardiogenic shock (CS).
BACKGROUND: There are limited data describing contemporary rates of achieving guideline-directed FMC-to-device times for STEMI patients with CS.
METHODS: From 2012 to 2014, the American Heart Association Mission: Lifeline STEMI Systems Accelerator project established a protocol-guided approach to STEMI reperfusion systems in 484 U.S. hospitals. The study was stratified by CS versus no CS at presentation and performed Cochrane-Armitage tests to evaluate trends of achieving FMC-to-device time targets. A multivariable logistic regression model assessed the association between achieving guideline-directed FMC-to-device times and mortality.
RESULTS: Among 23,785 STEMI patients, 1,993 (8.4%) experienced CS at presentation. For direct presenters, patients with CS were less likely to achieve the 90-min FMC-to-device time compared with no-CS patients (37% vs. 54%; p < 0.001). For transferred patients, CS patients were even less likely to reach the 120-min FMC-to-device time compared with no-CS patients (34% vs. 47%; p < 0.0001). The Accelerator intervention did not result in improvements in the FMC-to-device times for direct-presenting CS patients (p for trend = 0.53), although there was an improvement for transferred patients (p for trend = 0.04). Direct-presenting patients arriving within 90 min had lower mortality rates compared with patients who reached after 90 min (20.49% vs. 39.12%; p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Fewer than 40% of STEMI patients presenting with CS achieved guideline-directed FMC-to-device targets; delays in reperfusion for direct-presenting patients were associated with higher mortality.
Copyright © 2018 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  STEMI; cardiac arrest; cardiogenic shock; first-medical-contact to device; mortality; regional systems of care; treatment delays

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30236355     DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2018.06.030

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Interv        ISSN: 1936-8798            Impact factor:   11.195


  9 in total

1.  Contemporary Management of Cardiogenic Shock: A RAND Appropriateness Panel Approach.

Authors:  Alastair G Proudfoot; Antonis Kalakoutas; Susanna Meade; Mark J D Griffiths; Mir Basir; Francesco Burzotta; Sharon Chih; Eddy Fan; Jonathan Haft; Nasrien Ibrahim; Natalie Kruit; Hoong Sern Lim; David A Morrow; Jun Nakata; Susanna Price; Carolyn Rosner; Robert Roswell; Mark A Samaan; Marc D Samsky; Holger Thiele; Alexander G Truesdell; Sean van Diepen; Michelle Doughty Voeltz; Peter M Irving
Journal:  Circ Heart Fail       Date:  2021-11-22       Impact factor: 8.790

Review 2.  Acute Myocardial Infarction and Cardiogenic Shock Interventional Approach to Management in the Cardiac Catheterization Laboratories.

Authors:  Behnam N Tehrani; Abdulla A Damluji; Wayne B Batchelor
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rev       Date:  2022

Review 3.  A Standardized and Comprehensive Approach to the Management of Cardiogenic Shock.

Authors:  Behnam N Tehrani; Alexander G Truesdell; Mitchell A Psotka; Carolyn Rosner; Ramesh Singh; Shashank S Sinha; Abdulla A Damluji; Wayne B Batchelor
Journal:  JACC Heart Fail       Date:  2020-11       Impact factor: 12.035

4.  Sex and Gender Disparities in the Management and Outcomes of Acute Myocardial Infarction-Cardiogenic Shock in Older Adults.

Authors:  Saraschandra Vallabhajosyula; Saarwaani Vallabhajosyula; Shannon M Dunlay; Sharonne N Hayes; Patricia J M Best; Jorge A Brenes-Salazar; Amir Lerman; Bernard J Gersh; Allan S Jaffe; Malcolm R Bell; David R Holmes; Gregory W Barsness
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  2020-09       Impact factor: 7.616

5.  Impact of emergency medical service delays on time to reperfusion and mortality in STEMI.

Authors:  Ahmad Alrawashdeh; Ziad Nehme; Brett Williams; Karen Smith; Angela Brennan; Diem T Dinh; Danny Liew; Jeffrey Lefkovits; Dion Stub
Journal:  Open Heart       Date:  2021-05

6.  Predictors of Hospital Mortality in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock.

Authors:  Gábor Tamás Szabó; András Ágoston; Gábor Csató; Ildikó Rácz; Tamás Bárány; Gábor Uzonyi; Miklós Szokol; Balázs Sármán; Éva Jebelovszki; István Ferenc Édes; Dániel Czuriga; Rudolf Kolozsvári; Zoltán Csanádi; István Édes; Zsolt Kőszegi
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2021-02-01       Impact factor: 3.576

7.  Temporal trends in incidence, causes, use of mechanical circulatory support and mortality in cardiogenic shock.

Authors:  Benedikt Schrage; Peter Moritz Becher; Alina Goßling; Gianluigi Savarese; Salim Dabboura; Isabell Yan; Benedikt Beer; Gerold Söffker; Moritz Seiffert; Stefan Kluge; Paulus Kirchhof; Stefan Blankenberg; Dirk Westermann
Journal:  ESC Heart Fail       Date:  2021-02-19

Review 8.  Cardiogenic shock teams and centres: a contemporary review of multidisciplinary care for cardiogenic shock.

Authors:  Nima Moghaddam; Sean van Diepen; Derek So; Patrick R Lawler; Christopher B Fordyce
Journal:  ESC Heart Fail       Date:  2021-01-16

9.  Cardiogenic shock: incidence, survival and mechanical circulatory support usage 2007-2017-insights from a national registry.

Authors:  Corinna N Lang; Klaus Kaier; Viviane Zotzmann; Peter Stachon; Torben Pottgiesser; Constantin von Zur Muehlen; Manfred Zehender; Daniel Duerschmied; Bonaventura Schmid; Christoph Bode; Tobias Wengenmayer; Dawid L Staudacher
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2020-11-30       Impact factor: 5.460

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.