Waters Richard E, Singh Kanwar P, Roe Matthew T, Lotfi Mat, Sketch Michael H, Mahaffey Kenneth W, Newby L Kristin, Alexander John H, Harrington Robert A, Califf Robert M, Granger Christopher B
Duke University Medical Center and Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004 Jun 16;43(12):2153-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2003.12.057.
The focus for the initial approach to the treatment of acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) has shifted toward extending the benefits of mechanical reperfusion with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) to patients who present to community hospitals that have no interventional capabilities. Several randomized clinical trials have shown that transferring STEMI patients to tertiary centers for primary PCI leads to better outcomes than when fibrinolytic therapy is administered at community hospitals. Furthermore, potent pharmacologic reperfusion regimens that enhance early reperfusion of the infarct vessel before primary PCI may enhance the positive result of the transfer approach. Despite these promising findings, several obstacles have hindered the adoption of patient-transfer strategies in the U.S., including greater distances between community and tertiary hospitals, a lack of integrated emergency medical services, and the medical community's limited experience with centralized acute myocardial infarction (AMI) care networks. Nonetheless, the implementation of system-wide changes in the care of STEMI patients analogous to the creation of trauma networks could facilitate the creation and ongoing evaluation of dedicated patient transfer strategies and better early invasive care in the U.S. Within this context, a systematic, stepwise approach to the creation of AMI care networks and to the development of standard nomenclature and performance indicators is necessary to guide quality assurance monitoring and future research efforts as the care of STEMI patients is redefined. Consequently, this current evolution of reperfusion strategies has the potential to further reduce morbidity and mortality for patients presenting with STEMI.
急性ST段抬高型心肌梗死(STEMI)初始治疗方法的重点已转向将直接经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)机械再灌注的益处扩展至就诊于无介入能力的社区医院的患者。多项随机临床试验表明,将STEMI患者转运至三级中心进行直接PCI比在社区医院进行溶栓治疗能带来更好的结果。此外,在直接PCI前增强梗死血管早期再灌注的强效药物再灌注方案可能会提高转运方法的积极效果。尽管有这些令人鼓舞的发现,但在美国,仍有几个障碍阻碍了患者转运策略的采用,包括社区医院与三级医院之间距离更远、缺乏整合的紧急医疗服务,以及医学界对集中式急性心肌梗死(AMI)护理网络经验有限。尽管如此,在美国,实施类似于创建创伤网络的STEMI患者护理全系统变革,可能有助于创建并持续评估专门的患者转运策略,以及提供更好的早期侵入性护理。在此背景下,随着STEMI患者护理的重新定义,需要一种系统的、逐步的方法来创建AMI护理网络,以及制定标准术语和性能指标,以指导质量保证监测和未来的研究工作。因此,目前再灌注策略的这种演变有可能进一步降低STEMI患者的发病率和死亡率。