Sustaining Improvement in Door-to-Balloon Time Over 4 Years

Background— American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines recommend a door-to-balloon time (DTB) <90 minutes for nontransferred patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) who undergo primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Systems of care to achieve and sustain this DTB performance over several years have not been previously reported.

Methods and Results— The Mayo Clinic STEMI protocol was implemented in April 2004 and included activation of the cardiac catheterization laboratory by the emergency medicine physician; a single call system to activate the catheterization laboratory; catheterization laboratory staff arrival within 20 to 30 minutes of activation; and real-time performance feedback within 24 to 48 hours. Data were collected on nontransferred STEMI patients. The preimplementation group (June 2002 to March 2004) comprised 96 patients with a median DTB of 97 (interquartile range, 82, 130) minutes, and 40% had a DTB <90 minutes. The postimplementation group (May 2004 to March 2008) comprised 322 patients with a median DTB of 67 (interquartile range, 55, 82) minutes, and 81% had a DTB <90 minutes. Postimplementation DTB was significantly shorter than preimplementation DTB ( P <0.001). In the 4-year follow-up after protocol implementation, the DTB performance remained stable over time ( P =0.41).

Conclusions— The Mayo Clinic STEMI protocol implemented strategies to reduce DTB for nontransferred patients with STEMI. DTB was significantly reduced, and the results were sustained over the 4-year follow-up period. Our experience demonstrates the effectiveness and durability of process changes targeting timeliness of primary percutaneous coronary intervention.

Systems of care to improve timeliness of reperfusion therapy for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction during off hours: the Mayo Clinic STEMI protocol

OBJECTIVES

We implemented the Mayo Clinic ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) protocol and evaluated the timeliness of reperfusion therapy during off hours versus regular hours.

BACKGROUND

Patients with STEMI who present during off hours have longer door-to-balloon times and door-to-needle times.

METHODS

The Mayo STEMI protocol was implemented in May 2004 to optimize timeliness of reperfusion therapy for STEMI patients presenting to Saint Mary's Hospital, a tertiary facility with on-site percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and for those presenting to 28 regional hospitals located up to 150 miles away from Saint Mary's Hospital. We compared door-to-balloon times and door-to-needle times for 597 consecutive patients who presented during off hours (weekdays from 5 pm to 7 am and any time on weekends or holidays) versus regular hours (weekdays from 7 am to 5 pm). In 2003, prior to implementing the protocol, median door-to-balloon time at Saint Mary's Hospital was 85 min during regular hours and 98 min during off hours.

RESULTS

Among 258 patients who presented to Saint Mary's Hospital, median door-to-balloon time was 65 min during regular hours versus 74 min during off hours (p = 0.085). Among 105 patients transferred from regional hospitals for primary PCI, median door-to-balloon time was 118 min during regular hours versus 114 min during off hours (p = 0.15). Among 131 patients treated with fibrinolytic therapy at regional hospitals, median door-to-needle time was 21 min during regular hours versus 26 min during off hours (p = 0.067).

CONCLUSIONS

The Mayo Clinic STEMI protocol demonstrates the rapid times that can be achieved through coordinated systems of care for STEMI patients presenting during off hours and regular hours.

Regional Systems of Care to Optimize Timeliness of Reperfusion Therapy for ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction

Background— Quality improvement efforts have focused on strategies to improve the timeliness of reperfusion therapy in ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients who present to hospitals with and without percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) capability. We implemented and evaluated a protocol to optimize the timeliness of reperfusion therapy and to coordinate systems of care for a PCI center and 28 regional hospitals located up to 150 miles away across 3 states.

Methods and Results— The present study focused on a prospective, observational cohort of 597 patients who presented with ST-segment elevation and within 12 hours of symptom onset to Saint Marys Hospital and 28 regional hospitals up to 150 miles away between May 2004 and December 2006. The Mayo Clinic ST-elevation myocardial infarction protocol implemented strategies to improve timeliness of reperfusion therapy and to coordinate systems of care for transfer between hospitals. The study sample consisted of 258 patients who presented to Saint Marys Hospital and were treated with primary PCI (group A), 105 patients who presented to a regional hospital with symptom onset >3 hours and then were transferred for primary PCI (group B), and 131 patients who presented to a regional hospital with symptom onset <3 hours and were treated with full-dose fibrinolytic therapy (group C). For groups A and B, median door-to-balloon times were 71 and 116 minutes, respectively. Door-to-balloon time <90 minutes was achieved in 75% of group A and 12% of group B. Median door-to-needle time was 25 minutes for group C, and 70% had door-to-needle time <30 minutes.

Conclusions— The Mayo Clinic ST-elevation myocardial infarction protocol demonstrates the feasibility of implementing strategies to optimize the timeliness of reperfusion therapy and the times that can be achieved through coordinated systems of care for ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients presenting to a PCI center (Saint Marys Hospital) and 28 regional hospitals without PCI capability located up to 150 miles away across 3 states.

Arrhythmias in the office

The incidence of patients who present to the office with arrhythmia and hemodynamic instability is unknown. Emergency medical systems data, based on ambulance runs, are available only for patients who have had a cardiac arrest. When faced with an unstable or potentially unstable patient, however, we must be prepared to act quickly, safely, and accurately. This article addresses the general approach to such a patient; provides necessary information on office emergency preparation, including training, rapid response team protocol, and the use of automated external defibrillators; and addresses the identification and initial office management of the various rhythms that are capable of threatening a patient's life.

Initial approach to the patient who has chest pain

The last decade has seen extraordinary advances in the cardiovascular arena, particularly in the evaluation and management of the patient who has acute coronary syndromes. From bedside markers of myocardial damage to drug-eluting stents, technical advances are proliferating. Efforts in developing an international registry for acute aortic dissection have helped elucidate the acute presentation, management, and prognosis of this uncommon but lethal disease. Finally, the multiple research efforts in coordinating clinical decision-making with serologic markers and advanced imaging for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism is changing the approach to the patient at risk for thromboembolic disease.

Challenges, Controversies, and Advances in Aortic Catastrophes

Emergency physicians (EPs) are commonly faced with life-threatening entities. Particularly challenging are the aortic catastrophes, such as penetrating aortic ulcers (PAUs), intramural hematomas (IMHs), and atypical presentations of acute aortic dissections and ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms. Several factors account for this: (1) the rapidly evolving knowledge (particularly in the pathogenesis and precursors of aortic dissection [AD]), (2) the lack of comfort caused by infrequent exposure, (3) the misconceptions about the work up and treatment, (4) the lack of emergent vascular surgery back up in the community, and finally (5) the high short-term mortality and missed rates. Finally, the media has publicized cases of celebrities and other patients who experienced fatal outcomes when their aortic catastrophes went undiagnosed. Practitioners of emergency care should, therefore, understand the challenges, be aware of the recent advances, and help limit the controversies in the evaluation and management of these patients.