1 Division of Cardiology Duke Clinical Research Institute Durham NC.
2 Department of Internal Medicine University of Michigan Ann Arbor MI.
J Am Heart Assoc. 2019 Jan 8;8(1):e008096. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.118.008096.
Background We aimed to determine the change in treatment strategies and times to treatment over the first 5 years of the Mission: Lifeline program. Methods and Results We assessed pre- and in-hospital care and outcomes from 2008 to 2012 for patients with ST -segment-elevation myocardial infarction at US hospitals, using data from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network Registry-Get With The Guidelines Registry. In-hospital adjusted mortality was calculated including and excluding cardiac arrest as a reason for primary percutaneous coronary intervention delay. A total of 147 466 patients from 485 hospitals were analyzed. There was a decrease in the proportion of eligible patients not treated with reperfusion (6.2% versus 3.3%) and treated with fibrinolytic therapy (13.4% versus 7.0%). Median time from symptom onset to first medical contact was unchanged (≈50 minutes). Use of prehospital ECGs increased (45% versus 71%). All major reperfusion times improved: median first medical contact-to-device for emergency medical systems transport to percutaneous coronary intervention-capable hospitals (93 to 84 minutes), first door-to-device for transfers for primary percutaneous coronary intervention (130 to 112 minutes), and door-in-door-out at non-percutaneous coronary intervention-capable hospitals (76 to 62 minutes) (all P<0.001 over 5 years). Rates of cardiogenic shock and cardiac arrest, and overall in-hospital mortality increased (5.7% to 6.3%). Adjusted mortality excluding patients with known cardiac arrest decreased by 14% at 3 years and 25% at 5 years ( P<0.001). Conclusions Quality of care for patients with ST -segment-elevation myocardial infarction improved over time in Mission: Lifeline, including increased use of reperfusion therapy and faster times-to-treatment. In-hospital mortality improved for patients without cardiac arrest but did not appear to improve overall as the number of these high-risk patients increased.
背景 我们旨在确定 Mission: Lifeline 项目实施的前 5 年内治疗策略和治疗时间的变化。 方法和结果 我们使用美国国家心血管数据注册中心急性冠状动脉治疗和干预结果网络注册-GET WITH THE GUIDELINES 注册中心的数据,评估了 2008 年至 2012 年期间在 US 医院因 ST 段抬高型心肌梗死住院的患者的院前和院内护理及结局。包括和不包括心搏骤停作为经皮冠状动脉介入治疗延迟的原因在内,计算院内校正死亡率。共分析了来自 485 家医院的 147466 名患者。未接受再灌注治疗的符合条件的患者比例(6.2% 比 3.3%)和接受纤维蛋白溶解治疗的患者比例(13.4% 比 7.0%)有所下降。从症状发作到首次医疗接触的中位数时间保持不变(约 50 分钟)。院前心电图的使用增加(45% 比 71%)。所有主要再灌注时间均有所改善:从首次医疗接触到能够进行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的医院的急救医疗系统转运的设备时间中位数(93 分钟至 84 分钟)、从转移到进行直接经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的门到设备时间中位数(130 分钟至 112 分钟)和非经皮冠状动脉介入治疗能力医院的门到门时间中位数(76 分钟至 62 分钟)(所有 5 年都有显著改善,P<0.001)。心源性休克和心脏骤停的发生率以及总的院内死亡率均有所增加(5.7%至 6.3%)。在 3 年和 5 年时,排除已知心脏骤停患者的校正死亡率分别下降了 14%和 25%(P<0.001)。 结论 随着时间的推移,在 Mission: Lifeline 项目中,ST 段抬高型心肌梗死患者的护理质量有所提高,包括再灌注治疗的使用率增加和治疗时间更快。对于没有心脏骤停的患者,院内死亡率有所改善,但由于这些高危患者数量的增加,整体死亡率似乎并未改善。