|
|
||||||||||
|
J Am Coll Cardiol, 1998; 32:629-633 © 1998 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation |
a Department of Cardiology, Hospital de Weezenlanden, Zwolle, The Netherlands
Manuscript received December 29, 1997; revised manuscript received April 22, 1998, accepted May 11, 1998.
Address for correspondence: Dr. Felix Zijlstra, Department of Cardiology, Hospital de Weezenlanden, Groot Wezenland 20, 8011 JW Zwolle, The Netherlands
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Background. Several randomized trials have demonstrated the benefits of primary angioplasty in acute myocardial infarction. In recent years, increasing numbers of patients with myocardial infarction, initially admitted to hospitals without angioplasty facilities are transported to our hospital for primary angioplasty. However, the additional delay due to the transport may have a deleterious effect on infarct size and clinical outcome.
Methods. In a three-year period (December 1993 to November 1996), 207 consecutive patients who were transferred for primary angioplasty were analyzed in a matched comparison with nontransferred patients. Matching criteria were age, sex, infarct location, presentation delay and Killip class.
Results. Patients who were transferred had an additional median delay of 43 min. This resulted in a more extensive enzymatic infarct size and a lower ejection fraction measured at 6 months. The rate of angioplasty success defined as TIMI grade 3 flow, and the 6-month mortality rate (7%) were comparable in both groups.
Conclusions. The additional delay had a deleterious effect on myocardial salvage, reflected by a larger infarct size and a lower left ventricular function. However, the patency rate and 6-month clinical outcome were not affected by this delay.
| ||||||||||||||||||
| Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Study design.
Acute MI was diagnosed if a patient had persistent symptoms of chest pain lasting more than 30 min and had ST segment elevation of
1 mm in at least 2 contiguous leads. The indications for transfer were: electrocardiographic evidence of an anterior or large inferior infarction, contraindications for thrombolytic therapy (relative or absolute) or hemodynamic instability (Killip class >1). The cumulative sum of ST elevation was scored on the diagnostic electrocardiogram. The exclusion criteria were identical as previously described (11). All transfer patients underwent immediate coronary angiography followed by primary angioplasty if indicated; patients were not treated with primary angioplasty if they had severe multivessel coronary artery disease or involvement of the left main coronary artery that made subsequent urgent coronary bypass grafting (CABG) necessary. Patients with an open infarct-related vessel (IRV) in whom no reperfusion therapy was indicated were treated conservatively. After primary angioplasty, flow through the IRV was scored according to the TIMI classification. The angiograms were all read by two cardiologists blinded for group allocation and clinical data. Primary angioplasty was considered successful if the residual stenosis in the IRV was less than 50% and TIMI grade 3 flow was present after the procedure.
Enzymatic infarct size. Infarct size was determined by measurements of enzyme concentrations with lactate dehydrogenase as reference enzyme (LDHQ72). A two-compartment model was used, which has been validated in studies on the turnover of radio-labeled plasma proteins and circulating enzymes. Cumulative enzyme release was calculated from serial measurements up to 72 h after symptom onset. Samples were obtained on admission and every 12 h to 72 h thereafter. From these measurements, an area under the curve was calculated, from at least five measurements. Further details of this methods have been described before (11,13,19,20).
Left ventricular function. At 6-month follow-up left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was measured with a radionuclide technique as previously described (11,13). Measurements were done by the multiple-gated equilibrium method after labeling of red blood cells with technetium 99m pertechnetate. A gamma-camera (General Electric, Milwaukee, WI, USA) was used. The global LVEF was calculated with the PAGE program (version 2.3).
Clinical outcome. Follow-up information was obtained for all patients. Hospital records of patients who visited our outpatient clinic were reviewed. Information on transferred patients was obtained from referral cardiologists. If necessary, additional information was gathered by telephone contact with general physicians or patients.
Clinical parameters. In this analysis we compared the following clinical parameters: enzymatic infarct size (LDHQ72), LVEF and TIMI flow after primary angioplasty was scored. At 6-month follow-up mortality (of all causes) and recurrent MI were evaluated in both groups. Recurrent MI was defined as the combination of chest pain, changes in the ST-T segment at rest, and a second increase in the creatine kinase level to more than two times the upper limit of normal, or an increase of more than 200 IU/liter over the previous value if the level had not dropped below the upper limit of normal (11). Recurrent infarction and mortality were assessed at 6-month follow-up.
Statistical methods. Time intervals are presented as medians with 25th and 75th percentiles. Data were analyzed as a matched pairs study. The Wilcoxon signed rank test was used to compare means of continuous variables and the chi-square test or Fischer exact test for discrete variables. Two-sided p values <0.05 were considered to be significant.
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
|
Six-month follow-up. At 6 months, a total of 15 (7%) patients in the transfer group and 12 patients in the nontransfer group (6%) had died. Reinfarction had occurred in 8 (4%) of the transfer patients and in 6 (3%) of the nontransfer patients (Table 3). LVEF was measured at 6 months in 139 matched pairs (72%) of the survivors. Nontransfer patients had an ejection fraction of 47% versus 43% in the transfer patients (p = 0.003). In 27 (13%) patients in the transfer group and in 17 (8%) patients in the nontransfer group, a LVEF measurement was not available; in a small number of patients the test was performed but inconclusive due to an irregular heart rhythm (3 patients in the transfer group and 2 in the nontransfer group). Reasons for not performing this test were inability to return to our hospital (e.g., travel distance) or patient refusal.
|
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Myocardial salvage. The effects of treatment delay could be measured in enzymatic infarct size as well as LVEF. However, more factors may play a role in the degree of myocardial salvage. The presence or absence of collaterals, the size of the infarct area, history of previous infarction or previous angina will be responsible for a wide range of outcomes in individual patients. Nevertheless, for these patient groups a difference in measured infarct size and LVEF was found in relation with a median treatment delay of 43 min.
Transfer for primary angioplasty. Only a limited number of hospitals have angioplasty facilities and most patients with acute MI will be admitted to hospitals without these facilities. Urgent transfer of infarct patients to angioplasty centers is an alternative option to treatment with thrombolysis administered at the community hospital. By evaluation of this cohort of patients who have been transferred for primary angioplasty to our hospital, it is demonstrated that this treatment strategy is safe and can be done effectively. Interhospital delays are minimized by timely referral by the physician at the referral hospital. On arrival at the angioplasty center the patient can be brought to the catherization laboratory immediately. Measures to prepare the catherization laboratory can be made during the patient transport.
Study limitations. This study population represents a selected group of patients, slightly younger than the usual infarct population and with a short presentation delay. Concerning the high percentage of anterior infarctions the transfer patients are a population at higher risk. This fact has probably contributed to the differences found in enzymatic infarct size and LVEF. In patients with nonanterior infarctions, the area at risk would be smaller, and differences expressed in infarct size and LVEF might not be measurable. Also the fact that the total delay before treatment for both groups was within the period of myocardial salvage may have contributed in the difference between the transported patients and matched controls. A bias might be introduced by the fact that some of the clinically better patients did not return for the LVEF test, but only in 13% of the transported patients and in 8% of the matched controls LVEF measurement was not available. The large majority of patients had completed data for enzymatic infarct size and LVEF, but in a matched comparison the percentage of available results in patient pairs is obviously lower. This analysis does not answer the question whether it would be more beneficial to transfer a patient for primary angioplasty than to treat these patients immediately with thrombolysis. This comparison can only be made by means of a randomized trial.
Conclusions. This analysis demonstrates that the success of primary angioplasty in patients with acute MI is not influenced by an additional delay due to interhospital transfer. Analysis of time intervals showed that in our setting the additional delay is limited and only 43 min longer in patients transferred from community hospitals compared to patients admitted directly to the angioplasty center. Therefore total time from symptom onset to first balloon inflation is within a 6 h time window for most patients. The effect of the additional treatment delay on myocardial salvage measured in enzymatic infarct size and in LVEF at 6 months was estimated by a matched pair analysis. Although the additional delay was limited there was a measurable effect on myocardial salvage, which indicates the need to reduce time to treatment in patients treated with primary angioplasty. In this particular setting and infrastructure, the transfer of patients for primary angioplasty is safe and can be done with a limited loss of time. The high success rate in the transfer patients is encouraging to apply this treatment strategy for patients with high-risk features (contraindications for thrombolysis, anterior infarct location and/or hemodynamic instability). However, in each individual patient it should be clear that an additional delay during the first hours of acute MI results in more extensive myocardial damage. If transfer for primary angioplasty is the treatment strategy of choice then the rule "time is muscle" still holds good.
Clinical implications. The strategy to transfer patients with acute MI admitted to a community hospital without angioplasty facilities to an angioplasty center is safe and effective. If the time from symptom onset to treatment does not exceed the period in which myocardial salvage is possible, the results of primary angioplasty will be comparable to those obtained in patients directly admitted to an angioplasty center. Reductions in time to treatment can result in substantial additional myocardial salvage.
| Acknowledgments |
|---|
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
S. G. Ellis, M. Tendera, M. A. de Belder, A. J. van Boven, P. Widimsky, L. Janssens, H.R. Andersen, A. Betriu, S. Savonitto, J. Adamus, et al. Facilitated PCI in Patients with ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction N. Engl. J. Med., May 22, 2008; 358(21): 2205 - 2217. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H. Sakamoto, L. M. Parish, H. Hamamoto, L. P. Ryan, T. J. Eperjesi, T. J. Plappert, B. M. Jackson, M. G. St John-Sutton, J. H. Gorman III, and R. C. Gorman Effect of Reperfusion on Left Ventricular Regional Remodeling Strains After Myocardial Infarction Ann. Thorac. Surg., November 1, 2007; 84(5): 1528 - 1536. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Carstensen, G. C.I. Nelson, P. S. Hansen, L. Macken, S. Irons, M. Flynn, P. Kovoor, S. Y. Soo Hoo, M. R. Ward, and H. H. Rasmussen Field triage to primary angioplasty combined with emergency department bypass reduces treatment delays and is associated with improved outcome Eur. Heart J., October 1, 2007; 28(19): 2313 - 2319. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. Dudek, T. Rakowski, A. Dziewierz, and W. Mielecki Time delay in primary angioplasty: how relevant is it? Heart, October 1, 2007; 93(10): 1164 - 1166. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. P. Wharton Jr, E. C. Keeley, C. L. Grines, T. P. Wharton Jr, E. C. Keeley, and C. L. Grines The Case for Community Hospital Angioplasty Circulation, November 29, 2005; 112(22): 3509 - 3534. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R Zahn, A Vogt, U Zeymer, A K Gitt, K Seidl, M Gottwik, M A Weber, W Niederer, B Modl, H-J Engel, et al. In-hospital time to treatment of patients with acute ST elevation myocardial infarction treated with primary angioplasty: determinants and outcome. Results from the registry of percutaneous coronary interventions in acute myocardial infarction of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Leitender Kardiologischer Krankenhausarzte Heart, August 1, 2005; 91(8): 1041 - 1046. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H. C. Herrmann Transfer for Primary Angioplasty: The Importance of Time Circulation, February 15, 2005; 111(6): 718 - 720. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. Widimsky, T. Budesinsky, D. Vorac, L. Groch, M. Zelizko, M. Aschermann, M. Branny, J. St'asek, P. Formanek, and on behalf of the 'PRAGUE' Study Group Investigator Long distance transport for primary angioplasty vs immediate thrombolysis in acute myocardial infarction: Final results of the randomized national multicentre trial--PRAGUE-2 Eur. Heart J., January 1, 2003; 24(1): 94 - 104. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. H. Mehta, D. A. Criger, C. B. Granger, K. K. Pieper, R. M. Califf, E. J. Topol, and E. R. Bates Patient outcomes after fibrinolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction at hospitals with and without coronary revascularization capability J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., September 18, 2002; 40(6): 1034 - 1040. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Singh, H. H. Ting, P. B. Berger, K. N. Garratt, D. R. Holmes Jr, and B. J. Gersh Rationale for on-site cardiac surgery for primary angioplasty: a time for reappraisal J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., June 19, 2002; 39(12): 1881 - 1889. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E.M. Antman, H.A. Cooper, C.M. Gibson, J.A. de Lemos, C.H. McCabe, R.P. Giugliano, P. Coussement, S. Murphy, J. Scherer, K. Anderson, et al. Determinants of improvement in epicardial flow and myocardial perfusion for ST elevation myocardial infarction. Insights from TIMI 14 and InTIME-II Eur. Heart J., June 2, 2002; 23(12): 928 - 933. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
F Zijlstra, A Patel, M Jones, C.L Grines, S Ellis, E Garcia, L Grinfeld, R.J Gibbons, E.E Ribeiro, F Ribichini, et al. Clinical characteristics and outcome of patients with early (<2h), intermediate (2-4h) and late (>4h) presentation treated by primary coronary angioplasty or thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction Eur. Heart J., April 1, 2002; 23(7): 550 - 557. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
I. Sheiban, G. Fragasso, G. M. C. Rosano, A. Dharmadhikari, V. Tzifos, P. Pagnotta, S. L. Chierchia, and G. Trevi Time course and determinants of left ventricular function recovery after primary angioplasty in patients with acute myocardial infarction J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., August 1, 2001; 38(2): 464 - 471. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. B. Greenbaum, R. A. Harrington, M. P. Hudson, C. M. MacAulay, R. G. Wilcox, M. L. Simoons, L. G. Berdan, A. Guerci, D. V. Cokkinos, M. M. Kitt, et al. Therapeutic value of eptifibatide at community hospitals transferring patients to tertiary referral centers early after admission for acute coronary syndromes J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., February 1, 2001; 37(2): 492 - 498. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
F. Zijlstra Long-term benefit of primary angioplasty compared to thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction Eur. Heart J., September 2, 2000; 21(18): 1487 - 1489. [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. Zahn, R. Schiele, K. Seidl, T. Kapp, H. G. Glunz, E. Jagodzinski, T. Voigtlander, M. Gottwik, G. Berg, H. Thomas, et al. Acute myocardial infarction occurring in versus out of the hospital: patient characteristics and clinical outcome J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., June 1, 2000; 35(7): 1820 - 1826. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. Widimsky, L. Groch, M. Zelizko, M. Aschermann, F. Bednar, and H. Suryapranata Multicentre randomized trial comparing transport to primary angioplasty vs immediate thrombolysis vs combined strategy for patients with acute myocardial infarction presenting to a community hospital without a catheterization laboratory. The PRAGUE Study Eur. Heart J., May 2, 2000; 21(10): 823 - 831. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. Boersma, M. Akkerhuis, M. L. Simoons, F. Zijlstra, M.-J. de Boer, D. P. Faxon, and J. W. Heger Primary Angioplasty versus Thrombolysis for Acute Myocardial Infarction N. Engl. J. Med., March 23, 2000; 342(12): 890 - 892. [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
A. M. Ross, K. S. Coyne, J. S. Reiner, S. W. Greenhouse, C. Fink, A. Frey, E. Moreyra, M. Traboulsi, N. Racine, A. L. Riba, et al. A randomized trial comparing primary angioplasty with a strategy of short-acting thrombolysis and immediate planned rescue angioplasty in acute myocardial infarction: the PACT trial J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., December 1, 1999; 34(7): 1954 - 1962. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | SUBSCRIPTIONS | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | CARDIOSOURCE | SEARCH | HELP | FEEDBACK |