Primary percutaneous coronary intervention delay for patients living in a peripheral area in Denmark.

INTRODUCTION In patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), timely primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) is superior to thrombolysis and it is the preferred treatment in Denmark. The prognosis depends on the time delay until coronary blood flow is re-established. The purpose of this registry study was to evaluate the PPCI treatment delay of the triage algorithm in a peripheral area in the Region of Central Jutland in the context of European guidelines. MATERIAL AND METHODS From 1 September 2009 through 31 August 2010, we included all PPCI-treated patients from the catchment area of Regional Hospital Herning (RHH) who were diagnosed with probable STEMI based on the first electrocardiography wirelessly transmitted to the physician on call at RHH after symptom onset. RESULTS A total of 101 patients were included, 77% were males and their median age was 63.4 years. The median distance to the PCI centre was 120.3 (range 63.5-174.2) km. The 2008 European guidelines on transportation delay were fulfilled for 35 (35%) patients and the 2012 European guidelines for seven (7%) patients. Overall, 46% of the patients had a delay from first medical contact to PCI < 120 min., 9% a delay < 90 min. and none a delay < 60 min. CONCLUSION Our registry study showed that 35% and 7% of PPCI patients from a peripherally located area in Denmark met the 2008 and 2012 European guidelines for an acceptable transport delay to a PCI centre, respectively. Our current PPCI triage strategy therefore needs reconsideration. FUNDING not relevant. TRIAL REGISTRATION not relevant.

[1]  P. Armstrong,et al.  Fibrinolysis or primary PCI in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. , 2013, The New England journal of medicine.

[2]  C. Terkelsen,et al.  Earlier reperfusion in patients with ST-elevation Myocardial infarction by use of helicopter , 2012, Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine.

[3]  G. Meyer,et al.  Percutaneous Coronary Interventions Without On-Site Cardiac Surgical Backup , 2012 .

[4]  D. Atar,et al.  ESC Guidelines for the Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction in Patients Presenting With ST-Segment Elevation , 2013 .

[5]  M. Madsen,et al.  Reperfusion delay in patients treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention: insight from a real world Danish ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction population in the era of telemedicine , 2012, European heart journal. Acute cardiovascular care.

[6]  T. Aversano,et al.  Outcomes of PCI at hospitals with or without on-site cardiac surgery. , 2012, The New England journal of medicine.

[7]  T. Henry,et al.  Safety and efficacy of a pharmaco-invasive reperfusion strategy in rural ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients with expected delays due to long-distance transfers. , 2012, European heart journal.

[8]  C. Johnston Health Care System Delay and Heart Failure in Patients with ST-segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Treated with Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Follow-up of Population-based Medical Registry Data , 2012 .

[9]  P. Janský,et al.  Pre-hospital treatment of STEMI patients. A scientific statement of the Working Group Acute Cardiac Care of the European Society of Cardiology , 2011, Acute cardiac care.

[10]  Jodi Thomson,et al.  System Delay and Mortality among Patients with STEMI Treated with Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , 2011 .

[11]  M. Abu-Fadel,et al.  Combined reperfusion strategies in ST-segment elevation MI: Rationale and current role , 2010, Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine.

[12]  C. Terkelsen Should the rebellious Danes stay with the balloons or should they adhere to the 2008 ESC ST-elevation myocardial infarction guidelines and re-introduce the lytics? , 2010, European Heart Journal.

[13]  J. Ornato,et al.  2009 Focused Updates: ACC/AHA Guidelines for the Management of Patients With ST‐Elevation Myocardial Infarction (Updating the 2004 Guideline and 2007 Focused Update) and ACC/AHA/SCAI Guidelines on Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (Updating the 2005 Guideline and 2007 Focused Update) , 2009, Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions.

[14]  Michael Weis,et al.  Management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with persistent ST-segment elevation: the Task Force on the Management of ST-Segment Elevation Acute Myocardial Infarction of the European Society of Cardiology. , 2008, European heart journal.

[15]  J. French,et al.  The pharmaco-invasive approach to STEMI: when should fibrinolytic-treated patients go to the “cath lab”? , 2008, Postgraduate Medical Journal.

[16]  David P Miller,et al.  Hospital Delays in Reperfusion for ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Implications When Selecting a Reperfusion Strategy , 2006, Circulation.

[17]  C. Terkelsen,et al.  Reduction of treatment delay in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction: impact of pre-hospital diagnosis and direct referral to primary percutanous coronary intervention. , 2005, European heart journal.

[18]  Elliott M. Antman,et al.  Time Delay to Treatment and Mortality in Primary Angioplasty for Acute Myocardial Infarction: Every Minute of Delay Counts , 2004, Circulation.

[19]  L. Morrison,et al.  Mortality and prehospital thrombolysis for acute myocardial infarction: A meta-analysis. , 2000, JAMA.

[20]  Gd Rotterdam Does time matter? A pooled analysis of randomized clinical trials comparing primary percutaneous coronary intervention and in-hospital fibrinolysis in acute myocardial infarction patients , 2006 .