Meta-Analysis Comparing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Pharmacoinvasive Therapy in Transfer Patients with ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction

Time-Dependent Risk for Recurrence in Survivors of Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events

INTRODUCTION

The prevalence of the population with a history of an occlusive cardiovascular event has been increasing in recent years, which means that a large number of patients will have a higher risk of presenting a fatal recurrence. The aim is to determine variables associated with time-to-recurrent cardiovascular events and analyze how changes in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels during follow-up may be associated with this time-to-event.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a prospective observational cohort study of 727 adults with a history of at least one occlusive cardiovascular event recruited at a referral hospital in northeastern Colombia. Data from a follow-up period of a maximum of 33 months (median 26 months) (one death) were used to define how clinical and sociodemographic variables impact the recurrence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Analyses were performed based on proportional hazard models and time-dependent hazard models.

RESULTS

Upon enrollment, 215 (30%) of the participants reported experiencing their most recent cardiovascular event within the preceding year. After two years, the recurrence rate was 12.38% (90/727). The risk of recurrence before two years was 3.9% (95% CI 2.7-5.6). In the multiple models, the presence of severe depression gives a Hazard Ratio of 8.25 (95% CI 2.98-22.86) and LDL ≥120 md/dl Hazard Ratio of 2.12 (95% CI 1.2 -3.9). It was found that LDL >120 mg/dl maintained over time increases the chances of recurrence by 1.7% (Hazard Ratio: 1.017, 95% CI 0.008-0.025).

CONCLUSIONS

The present study allows us to identify a profile of patients who should be treated promptly in an interdisciplinary manner to avoid recurrences of coronary events.

Outcomes in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention or pharmacoinvasive strategy in a Latin American country

OBJECTIVE

The primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) is the preferred reperfusion strategy for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). The pharmacoinvasive strategy (PIs) is a reasonable alternative when prompt PPCI is not possible, especially in resource-limited regions. We aimed to compare PPCI versus PIs outcomes in Peru.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study based on the second Peruvian Registry of STEMI (PERSTEMI II). We compared the characteristics, in-hospital outcomes and 30-day mortality of patients undergoing PPCI during the first 12 h and those receiving a PIs. A propensity score-matched analysis was conducted to compare the effects of each treatment strategy on clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

PIs patients were younger than PPCI patients, had a shorter first medical contact time, first medical contact to reperfusion time, and total ischemic time until reperfusion. Successful PCI was more frequent in the PIs group (84.4% vs. 71.1%, p = 0.035). There were no differences between PIs and PPCI in terms of total in-hospital mortality (5.2% vs. 6.6%, p = 0.703), cardiovascular mortality (4.2% vs. 5.3%, p = 0.735), cardiogenic shock (8.3% vs. 13.2%, p = 0.326), heart failure (19.8% vs. 30.3%, p = 0.112), or major bleeding (0% vs. 2.6%, p = 0.194). In the propensity score-matched analysis, the rates of cardiovascular mortality, postinfarction heart failure and successful reperfusion were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

In this real-world study, no differences were found in the in-hospital outcomes between patients with STEMI who received PIs or PPCI.

Management strategies and outcomes of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) during Covid-19 pandemic

Background

The COVID-19 outbreak represents a significant challenge to international health. Several studies have reported a substantial decrease in the number of patients attending emergency departments with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and there has been a concomitant rise in early mortality or complications during the COVID-19 pandemic. A modified management system that emphasizes nearby treatment, safety, and protection, alongside a closer and more effective multiple discipline collaborative team was developed by our Chest Pain Center at an early stage of the pandemic. It was therefore necessary to evaluate whether the newly adopted management strategies improved the clinical outcomes of ACS patients in the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

Patients admitted to our Chest Pain Center from January 25th to April 30th, 2020 based on electronic data in the hospitals ACS registry, were included in the COVID-19 group. Patients admitted during the same period (25 January to 30 April) in 2019 were included in the pre-COVID-19 group. The characteristics and clinical outcomes of the ACS patients in the COVID-19 period group were compared with those of the ACS patients in the pre-COVID-19 group. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to identify the risk factors associated with clinical outcomes.

Results

The number of patients presenting to the Chest Pain Center was reduced by 45% (p = 0.01) in the COVID-19 group, a total of 223 ACS patients were included in the analysis. There was a longer average delay from the onset of symptom to first medical contact (FMC) (1176.9 min vs. 625.2 min, p = 0.001) in the COVID-19 period group compared to the pre-COVID-19 group. Moreover, immediate percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (80.1% vs. 92.3%, p = 0.008) was performed less frequently on ACS patients in the COVID-19 group compared to the pre-COVID-19 group. However, more ACS patients received thrombolytic therapy (5.8% vs. 0.6%, p = 0.0052) in the COVID-19 group than observed in the pre-COVID-19 group. Interestingly, clinical outcome did not worsen in the COVID-19 group when cardiogenic shock, sustained ventricular tachycardia, ventricular fibrillation or use of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) were compared against the pre-COVID-19 group (13.5% vs. 11.6%, p = 0.55). Only age was independently associated with composite clinical outcomes (HR = 1.3; 95% CI 1.12–1.50, p = 0.003).

Conclusion

This retrospective study showed that the adverse outcomes were not different during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to historical control data, suggesting that newly adopted management strategies might provide optimal care for ACS patients. Larger sample sizes and longer follow-up periods on this issue are needed in the future.

Reperfusion Strategy of ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Meta-Analysis of Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Pharmaco-Invasive Therapy

Background

Pharmaco-invasive therapy (PIT), combining thrombolysis and percutaneous coronary intervention, was a potential complement for primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI), while bleeding risk was still a concern.

Objectives

This study aims to compare the efficacy and safety outcomes of PIT and pPCI.

Methods

A systematic search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies were conducted on Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane library, and Scopus. RCTs and observational studies were all collected and respectively analyzed, and combined pooled analysis was also presented. The primary efficacy outcome was short-term all-cause mortality within 30 days, including in-hospital period. The primary safety outcome was 30-day trial-defined major bleeding events.

Results

A total of 26,597 patients from 5 RCTs and 12 observational studies were included. There was no significant difference in short-term mortality [RCTs: risk ratio (RR): 1.14, 95% CI: 0.67–1.93, I² = 0%, p = 0.64; combined results: odds ratio (OR): 1.09, 95% CI: 0.93–1.29, I² = 0%, p = 0.30] and 30-day major bleeding events (RCTs: RR: 0.44, 95% CI: 0.07–2.93, I² = 0%, p = 0.39; combined results: OR: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.53–1.92, I² = 0%, p = 0.98). However, pPCI reduced risk of in-hospital major bleeding events, stroke and intracranial bleeding, but increased risk of in-hospital heart failure and 30-day heart failure in combined analysis of RCTs and observational studies, despite no significant difference in analysis of RCTs.

Conclusion

Pharmaco-invasive therapy could be an important complement for pPCI in real-world clinical practice under specific conditions, but studies aiming at optimizing thrombolysis and its combination of mandatory coronary angiography are also warranted.

Collaborative Heart Attack Management Program (CHAMP): use of prehospital thrombolytics to improve timeliness of STEMI management in British Columbia

Coronary artery disease is the second leading cause of death in Canada. Time to treatment in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is directly related to morbidity and mortality. Thrombolysis is the primary treatment for STEMI in many regions of Canada because of prolonged transport times to percutaneous coronary intervention-capable centres. To reduce time from first medical contact (FMC) to thrombolysis, some emergency medical services (EMS) systems have implemented prehospital thrombolysis (PHT). PHT is not a novel concept and has a strong evidence base showing reduced mortality.

Here, we describe a quality improvement initiative to decrease time from FMC to thrombolysis using PHT and aim to describe our methods and challenges during implementation. We used a quality improvement framework to collaborate with hospitals, EMS, cardiology, emergency medicine and other stakeholders during implementation. We trained advanced care paramedics to administer thrombolysis in STEMI with remote cardiologist support and aimed to achieve a guideline-recommended median FMC to needle time of <30 min in 80% of patients.

Overall, we reduced our median FMC to needle time by 70%. Our baseline patients undergoing in-hospital thrombolysis had a median time of 84 min (IQR 62–116 min), while patients after implementation of PHT had a median time of 25 min (IQR 23–39 min). Patients treated within the guideline-recommended time from FMC to needle of <30 min increased from 0% at baseline to 61% with PHT. Return on investment analysis showed $2.80 saved in acute care costs for every $1.00 spent on the intervention.

While we did not achieve our goal of 80% compliance with FMC to needle time of <30 min, our results show that the intervention substantially reduced the FMC to needle time and overall cost. We plan to continue with ongoing implementation of PHT through expansion to other communities in our province.

Complete Revascularization in Patients Undergoing a Pharmacoinvasive Strategy for ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Insights From the COMPLETE Trial

[Figure: see text].

Management and outcomes of uncomplicated ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients transferred after fibrinolytic therapy

BACKGROUND

This study sought to assess the contemporary outcomes of patients transferred after receiving fibrinolytic therapy ('drip-and-ship') for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in the United States.

METHODS

During 2009-2016, adults (>18 years) with STEMI (>18 years) without cardiac arrest and cardiogenic shock that received fibrinolytic therapy and were subsequently transferred were identified using the National Inpatient Sample (NIS). These admissions were divided into those undergoing fibrinolysis alone, subsequent coronary angiography (CA) without revascularization and subsequent CA with revascularization. Outcomes of interest included in-hospital mortality, resource utilization, and discharge disposition.

RESULTS

A total of 27,454 STEMI admissions receiving a 'drip-and-ship strategy', 96.3% and 85.8% received subsequent coronary angiography and revascularization Admissions receiving CA and revascularization were younger, male, and with lower comorbidity. The fibrinolysis alone cohort had higher rates of organ failure, hemorrhagic sequelae, and intracranial hemorrhage. Compared to the fibrinolysis cohort, CA with revascularization (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.17 [95% confidence interval {CI} 0.11-0.27]; p < .001) but not CA without revascularization (OR 0.72 [95% CI 0.42-1.21]; p = .21) was associated with lower in-hospital mortality. The fibrinolysis alone cohort had higher use of do-not-resuscitate status (12.8%) and fewer discharges to home (56.6%) compared to cohorts undergoing CA without (1.7%; 86.9%) and with (0.3% and 91.2%) revascularization, respectively. Presence of complications, do-not-resuscitate status, and higher comorbidity were predictive of lower CA and revascularization use.

CONCLUSION

Fibrinolysis with subsequent revascularization is associated with excellent outcomes in STEMI. Admissions receiving fibrinolysis alone were systematically different, sicker and had poorer outcomes.

Clinical Competence in ST-segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Management by Recently Graduated Physicians Applying for a Medical Residency Program

BACKGROUND

A significant reduction in the morbidity and mortality related to ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) has been achieved with the development of reperfusion therapies. Early diagnosis and correct initial management are important to ensure this benefit. In Brazil, recent graduates in medicine are responsible for a large part of the initial care provided for these patients.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the clinical competence in the diagnosis and initial treatment of STEMI by newly graduated physicians applying for a medical residency program.

METHODS

We assessed the performance of 771 applicants for the direct entry selection process of the FMRP-USP Clinical Hospital Medicine Residency Program, performed in a simulated setting of STEMI, with professional actors and medical evaluators, using a standardized checklist following the recommendations of the Brazilian Guidelines for the management of this disease.

RESULTS

The general performance score presented a median of 7 and an interquartile range of 5.5-8.0. In relation to the items assessed: 83% required ECG monitoring, 57% requested the insertion of a peripheral venous access catheter, 95% administered acetylsalicylic acid, 80% administered a second antiplatelet agent (p2y12 inhibitor), 66% administered nitrate, 71% administered morphine, 69% recognized the diagnosis of STEMI, 71% assessed the pain duration, 63% recognized the need for immediate transfer, 34% showed adequate communication skills and only 25% insisted on the transfer even in case of non-availability of beds.

CONCLUSIONS

The initial diagnosis and management of STEMI need to be improved in medical undergraduate courses and inserted into the reality of the hierarchical network structure of the Brazilian Unified Health System (SUS).

Pharmacoinvasive Strategy Versus Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction in Patients ≥70 Years of Age

The benefit-risk ratio of a pharmacoinvasive strategy (PI) in patients ≥70 years of age with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) remains uncertain resulting in its limited use in this population. This study compared efficacy and safety of PI with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI). Data from 2,841 patients (mean age: 78.1 ± 5.6 years, female: 36.1%) included in a prospective multicenter registry, and who underwent either PI (n = 269) or pPCI (n = 2,572), were analyzed. The primary end point was in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) defined as the composite of all-cause mortality, nonfatal MI, stroke, and definite stent thrombosis. Secondary end points included all-cause death, major bleeding, net adverse clinical events, and the development of in-hospital Killip class III or IV heart failure. Propensity-score matching and conditional logistic regression were used to adjust for confounders. Within the matched cohort, rates of MACE was not statistically different between the PI (n = 247) and pPCI (n = 958) groups, (11.3% vs 9.0%, respectively, odds ratio 1.25, 95% confidence interval 0.81 to 1.94; p = 0.31). Secondary end points were comparable between groups at the exception of a lower rate of development of Killip class III or IV heart failure after PI. The rate of intracranial hemorrhage was significantly higher in the PI group (2.3% vs 0.0%, p = 0.03). In conclusion, the present study demonstrated no difference regarding in-hospital MACE following PI or pPCI in STEMI patients ≥70 years of age. An adequately-powered randomized trial is needed to precisely define the role of PI in this high-risk subgroup.