Dib Chadi, Hanna Elias B, Chaudhry Muhammad A, Hennebry Thomas A, Stavrakis Stavros, Abu-Fadel Mazen S
Department of Internal Medicine, Section of Cardiovascular Diseases, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73104, USA.
Tex Heart Inst J. 2012;39(3):359-64.
In patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction, delay in door-to-balloon time strongly increases mortality rates. To our knowledge, no randomized studies to date have focused on reducing delays within the catheterization laboratory.We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients who presented with ST-elevation myocardial infarction at our institution from July 2006 through June 2010, looking primarily at time differences between percutaneous coronary intervention in the culprit vessel on the basis of ECG criteria, followed by contralateral angiography (Group 1), versus complete coronary angiography followed by culprit-vessel percutaneous intervention (Group 2).There were 49 patients in Group 1 and 57 patients in Group 2. No major differences in baseline characteristics were observed between the groups, except a higher prevalence of diabetes mellitus in Group 2. There was a statistically significant difference between Groups 1 and 2 in door-to-balloon time (median and interquartile range, 75 min [61-89] vs 87 min [70-115], P=0.03, respectively) and access-to-balloon time (12 min [9-18] vs 21 min [11-33], P=0.0006, respectively). Five Group 1 patients (10%) with inferior myocardial infarction had a contralateral culprit vessel. There were no differences in mortality rate or ejection fraction at the median 1-year follow-up. Four patients in Group 1 and 3 patients in Group 2 were referred for coronary artery bypass grafting after percutaneous intervention.This study suggests that performing culprit-vessel percutaneous intervention on the basis of electrocardiographic criteria, followed by angiography in patients with anterior ST-elevation myocardial infarction, might be the preferred approach, given the door-to-balloon time that is saved.
在ST段抬高型心肌梗死患者中,门球时间延迟会显著增加死亡率。据我们所知,迄今为止尚无随机研究聚焦于减少心导管室内部的延迟。我们对2006年7月至2010年6月在我院就诊的所有ST段抬高型心肌梗死患者进行了回顾性分析,主要观察基于心电图标准对罪犯血管进行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗,随后进行对侧血管造影(第1组),与先进行完整冠状动脉造影,随后对罪犯血管进行经皮介入治疗(第2组)之间的时间差异。第1组有49例患者,第2组有57例患者。除第2组糖尿病患病率较高外,两组间基线特征无重大差异。第1组和第2组在门球时间(中位数和四分位间距,分别为75分钟[61 - 89]对87分钟[70 - 115],P = 0.03)和穿刺至球囊时间(12分钟[9 - 18]对21分钟[11 - 33],P = 0.0006)方面存在统计学显著差异。第1组中有5例(10%)下壁心肌梗死患者存在对侧罪犯血管。在中位1年随访时,死亡率或射血分数无差异。第1组有4例患者和第2组有3例患者在经皮介入治疗后被转诊进行冠状动脉旁路移植术。本研究表明,对于前壁ST段抬高型心肌梗死患者,基于心电图标准先对罪犯血管进行经皮介入治疗,随后进行血管造影,鉴于节省的门球时间,可能是首选方法。