Dataset Information

Regional to tertiary inter-hospital transfer versus in-house percutaneous coronary intervention in acute coronary syndrome.

ABSTRACT:

Rationale

To address the inaccessibility of interventional cardiac services in North Queensland a new cardiac catheterisation laboratory (CCL) was established in Mackay Base Hospital (MBH) in February 2014.

Objective

To determine whether the provision of in-house angiography and/or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) 1) minimises treatment delays 2) further reduces the risk of mortality, recurrent myocardial infarction (MI) and recurrent ischaemia 3) improves patient satisfaction and 4) minimises cost expenditure compared with inter-hospital transfer for patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS).

Methods

We compared ACS patients who were transferred to tertiary centres from July 2012 to June 2013 with those who received in-house angiography and/or PCI from February 2015 to January 2016. The primary outcome was the composite of all-cause mortality, recurrent myocardial infarction (MI) or recurrent ischaemia at six months. Pre-specified secondary outcomes were the composite of all-cause mortality, recurrent MI or recurrent ischaemia at one month, a summated patient satisfaction score and the proportional cost savings generated between 2015 and 2016.

Results

We included consecutive samples of 203 patients from July 2012 to June 2013 and 229 patients from February 2015 to January 2016. There was a reduction in the median time to treatment of 3.2 days and a reduction in the median length of stay of four days amongst all ACS patients receiving in-house angiography and/or PCI. The primary outcome occurred in 14 (6.9%) patients in the 2012 to 2013 group, as compared with 18 (7.9%) patients in the 2015 to 2016 group (OR = 0.71, 95% CI 0.24-2.1, P = 0.54). The secondary outcome at one month occurred in four (2.0%) patients in the 2012 to 2013 group, as compared with three (1.3%) patients in the 2015 to 2016 group (OR = 1.2, 95% CI 0.11-13.1, P = 0.87). There was a statistically significant improvement in the summated patient satisfaction score amongst patients who received in-house angiography and/or PCI (U = 1918, P <0.05 two tailed). A calculation of estimated cost savings showed a reduction in proportional cost of $14 481 (51%) per ACS patient receiving in house angiography and/or PCI between 2015 and 2016.

Conclusion

This study suggests that the provision of regional in-house angiography and/or PCI for the treatment of ACS minimises delays to invasive treatment by 3.2 days, minimises the median length of stay by four days, significantly improves patient satisfaction and reduces proportional treatment costs by $14 481 (51%) per patient. Currently, however, it appears that that in-house treatment does not further reduce the risk of mortality, recurrent MI and recurrent ischaemia at one and six months.

SUBMITTER: Javat D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6013182 | biostudies-literature | 2018

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Regional to tertiary inter-hospital transfer versus in-house percutaneous coronary intervention in acute coronary syndrome.

Javat Delara D Heal Clare C Banks Jennifer J Buchholz Stefan S Zhang Zhihua Z

PloS one 20180621 6

<h4>Rationale</h4>To address the inaccessibility of interventional cardiac services in North Queensland a new cardiac catheterisation laboratory (CCL) was established in Mackay Base Hospital (MBH) in February 2014.<h4>Objective</h4>To determine whether the provision of in-house angiography and/or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) 1) minimises treatment delays 2) further reduces the risk of mortality, recurrent myocardial infarction (MI) and recurrent ischaemia 3) improves patient satisfac ...[more]

PMID: 29927947

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPrimary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) has been widely recognized as the preferred treatment for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). However, substantial numbers of STEMI patients cannot receive timely PPCI. Early fibrinolysis followed by routine percutaneous coronary intervention (FPCI) has been proposed as an effective and safe alternative for eligible patients. To date, few studies have compared FPCI with PPCI in terms of microvascular reperfusion. This study aimed to evaluate the microvascular function of FPCI and PPCI.MethodsSTEMI patients at the Peking University First Hospital and Miyun Hospital were enrolled in this retrospective study between January 2015 to December 2020. Microvascular function documented by the coronary angiography-derived index of microvascular resistance (caIMR) was measured at the final angiogram after revascularization. The primary end point was the caIMR of the culprit vessels. The secondary end points were in-hospital and follow-up major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), including cardiovascular death, non-fatal recurrent myocardial infarction, target-vessel revascularization (TVR), and non-fatal stroke/transient ischemic attacks (TIA). Details of the adverse clinical events were obtained from telephone interviews and electronic medical record systems until January 2022.ResultsIn total, 496 STEMI patients were enrolled in this cross-sectional retrospective study. Of these patients, 81 underwent FPCI, and 415 underwent PPCI. At the baseline, the PPCI patients had a higher-risk profile than the FPCI patients. The time from symptom onset to reperfusion therapy was significantly shorter in the FPCI group than the PPCI group (median 3.0 vs. 4.5 hours; P<0.001). The caIMR was significantly lower in the FPCI group than the PPCI group (median 20.34 vs. 40.33; P<0.001). The median follow-up duration was 4.1 years. During the follow-up period, the rate of MACE was lower in the FPCI group than the PPCI group [7 (10.1%) vs. 82 (20.8%), P=0.048]. After propensity score matching to adjust for the imbalances at the baseline, the caIMR remained significant and the clinical outcomes did not differ significantly between the two groups.ConclusionsIn eligible STEMI patients, clinically successful FPCI may be associated with better microvascular reperfusion and comparable clinical outcomes as compared with PPCI.

Project description:Patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) require rapid identification and triage to initiate reperfusion therapy. Walk-in STEMI patients have longer treatment times compared to emergency medical service (EMS) transported patients. While effective triage of large numbers of critically ill patients in the emergency department is often cited as the reason for treatment delays, additional factors have not been explored. The purpose of this study was to evaluate baseline demographic and clinical differences between walk-in and EMS-transported STEMI patients and identify factors associated with prolonged door to balloon (D2B) time in walk-in STEMI patients.We performed a retrospective review of 136 STEMI patients presenting to an urban academic teaching center from January 2009 through December 2010. Baseline demographics, mode of hospital entry (walk-in versus EMS transport), treatment times, angiographic findings, procedures performed and in-hospital clinical events were collected. We compared walk-in and EMS-transported STEMI patients and identified independent factors of prolonged D2B time for walk-in patients using stepwise logistic regression analysis.Walk-in patients (n=51) were more likely to be Latino and presented with a higher heart rate, higher systolic blood pressure, prior history of diabetes mellitus and were more likely to have an elevated initial troponin value, compared to EMS-transported patients. EMS-transported patients (n=64) were more likely to be white and had a higher prevalence of left main coronary artery disease, compared to walk-in patients. Door to electrocardiogram (ECG), ECG to catheterization laboratory (CL) activation and D2B times were significantly longer for walk-in patients. Walk-in patients were more likely to have D2B time >90 minutes, compared to EMS- transported patients; odds ratio 3.53 (95% CI 1.03, 12.07), p=0.04. Stepwise logistic regression identified hospital entry mode as the only independent predictor for prolonged D2B time.Baseline differences exist between walk-in and EMS-transported STEMI patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Hospital entry mode was the most important predictor for prolonged treatment times for primary PCI, independent of age, Latino ethnicity, heart rate, systolic blood pressure and initial troponin value. Prolonged door to ECG and ECG to CL activation times are modifiable factors associated with prolonged treatment times in walk-in STEMI patients. In addition to promoting the use of EMS transport, efforts are needed to rapidly identify and expedite the triage of walk-in STEMI patients.

Dataset Information

Regional to tertiary inter-hospital transfer versus in-house percutaneous coronary intervention in acute coronary syndrome.

Rationale

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Regional to tertiary inter-hospital transfer versus in-house percutaneous coronary intervention in acute coronary syndrome.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets