Dafaalla Mohamed, Rashid Muhammad, Sun Louise, Quinn Tom, Timmis Adam, Wijeysundera Harindra, Bagur Rodrigo, Michos Erin, Curzen Nick, Mamas Mamas A
Keele Cardiovascular Research Group, School of Medicine, Keele University, Stoke-on-Trent, United Kingdom; Department of Cardiology, Royal Stoke University Hospital, Stoke-on-Trent, United Kingdom.
Division of Cardiac Anesthesiology, University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Resuscitation. 2022 Jan;170:327-334. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2021.10.031. Epub 2021 Oct 27.
We aimed to identify whether the availability of catheter laboratory affects clinical outcomes of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) complicating myocardial infarction (AMI).
Patients admitted with a diagnosis of AMI and OHCA from the Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project (MINAP) between 2010 to 2017 were stratified into three groups based on initial hospital's catheter laboratory status: hospitals without a catheter laboratory (No-catheter lab hospitals), hospitals with diagnostic catheter laboratory (Diagnostic hospitals), and hospitals with PCI facilities (PCI hospitals). We used multivariable logistic regression to evaluate factors associated with clinical outcomes.
We included 12,303 patients of which 9,798 were admitted to PCI hospitals, 1,595 to no-catheter lab hospitals, and 910 to diagnostic hospitals. Patients admitted to PCI hospitals were more frequently reviewed by a cardiologist (96%, p < 0.001) than no-catheter lab hospitals (80%) and diagnostic hospitals (74%), and more likely to receive coronary angiography (PCI hospitals (87%), diagnostic hospitals (31%), no-catheter lab hospitals (54%), p < 0.001). They also were more likely to undergo PCI (PCI hospitals (42%), diagnostic hospitals (17%), no-catheter lab hospitals (17%), p < 0.001). After adjustment, there was no significant difference in the in-hospital mortality (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.55-1.06) or re-infarction (OR 1.28, 95% CI 0.72-2.26) in patients admitted to PCI hospitals nor in patients admitted to diagnostic hospitals (mortality (OR 1.28, 95% CI 0.72-2.26), re-infarction (OR 1.38, 95% CI 0.68-2.82)).
There is variation in coronary angiography use between hospitals without a catheter laboratory and PCI centres, which was not associated with better in-hospital survival.
我们旨在确定导管室的可用性是否会影响合并心肌梗死(AMI)的院外心脏骤停(OHCA)的临床结局。
将2010年至2017年间因AMI和OHCA诊断入院的心肌缺血国家审计项目(MINAP)患者,根据初始医院的导管室状况分为三组:无导管室的医院(无导管室医院)、有诊断性导管室的医院(诊断性医院)和有PCI设施的医院(PCI医院)。我们使用多变量逻辑回归来评估与临床结局相关的因素。
我们纳入了12303例患者,其中9798例入住PCI医院,1595例入住无导管室医院,910例入住诊断性医院。入住PCI医院的患者比无导管室医院(80%)和诊断性医院(74%)更频繁地接受心脏病专家的检查(96%,p<0.001),并且更有可能接受冠状动脉造影(PCI医院(87%)、诊断性医院(31%)、无导管室医院(54%),p<0.001)。他们也更有可能接受PCI(PCI医院(42%)、诊断性医院(17%)、无导管室医院(17%),p<0.001)。调整后,入住PCI医院的患者和入住诊断性医院的患者在院内死亡率(OR 0.76,95%CI 0.55-1.06)或再梗死率(OR 1.28,95%CI 0.72-2.26)方面没有显著差异(死亡率(OR 1.28,95%CI 0.72-2.26),再梗死率(OR 1.38,95%CI 0.68-2.82))。
无导管室的医院和PCI中心在冠状动脉造影的使用上存在差异,这与更好的院内生存率无关。