Fox Keith A A, Huber Kurt
Division of Medical and Radiological Sciences at Edinburgh University, Edinburgh, UK.
Nat Clin Pract Cardiovasc Med. 2008 Nov;5(11):708-14. doi: 10.1038/ncpcardio1343. Epub 2008 Sep 16.
For the management of ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction (STEMI), international guidelines recommend primary percutaneous coronary intervention with adjunctive antithrombotic therapy, the management of complications, and secondary prevention measures. Delivery of care has, however, lagged behind establishing the evidence for effectiveness. Approximately a quarter of all patients with STEMI still fail to receive reperfusion therapy. Additionally, for most patients delays substantially exceed guideline recommendations and secondary prevention is incomplete. What can be done? First, cardiologists need to take the lead in improving systems of care, with the integration of prehospital care within 'heart attack networks' involving intervention centers, nonintervention hospitals, primary care, and paramedic ambulance care. Several examples show that such systems are feasible. 'Door-to-balloon' initiatives can improve care in the final interventional hospital, but only make a modest contribution to total patient delay. Second, high-risk patients, including the elderly and those with cardiac complications like heart failure, should be targeted for more-aggressive interventional and pharmacologic therapy; the opposite situation currently exists in clinical practice (the treatment-risk paradox). Third, greater emphasis on quality improvement, collaboration among health professionals, and achieving high-quality care for all is required from funding bodies, regulatory agencies and professional societies.
对于ST段抬高型急性心肌梗死(STEMI)的管理,国际指南推荐采用辅助抗栓治疗的直接经皮冠状动脉介入治疗、并发症管理及二级预防措施。然而,医疗服务的提供落后于有效性证据的确立。在所有STEMI患者中,约四分之一仍未接受再灌注治疗。此外,对于大多数患者而言,延误时间大幅超过指南推荐,且二级预防并不完善。该如何应对?首先,心脏病专家需率先改善医疗体系,将院前医疗整合到涵盖介入中心、非介入医院、初级保健及护理人员救护车服务的“心脏病发作网络”中。若干实例表明此类体系是可行的。“门球时间”计划可改善最终介入医院的医疗服务,但对患者总延误时间的影响不大。其次,应针对高危患者,包括老年人以及患有心力衰竭等心脏并发症的患者,采取更积极的介入和药物治疗;而目前临床实践中的情况恰恰相反(治疗风险悖论)。第三,资助机构、监管机构及专业协会需更加强调质量改进、卫生专业人员之间的协作以及为所有人提供高质量医疗服务。