Reperfusion Strategy in Europe: Temporal Trends in Performance Measures for Reperfusion Therapy in ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction

Similar documents
Impact of in-hospital delay to invasive treatment of NSTEMI patients on early and 12-month clinical outcomes

Daily practice of ACS management in the Gulf: Data from Gulf COAST

No conflict of interest to declare

Alex versus Xience Registry Preliminary report

Transfer in D2B. Scott D Friedman, MD FACC Medical Director, Cardiology Services Shore Health System of Maryland. The Problem

Pharmaco-Invasive Approach for STEMI

Recommendations for criteria for STEMI systems of care: A focus on pharmacoinvasive strategies

Treatment of ST-elevation myocardial infarction in China: Where are we?

IABP SHOCK II trial:

STEMI Management in Belgium

REFERRAL HOSPITAL. The Importance of Door In Door Out Time DIDO

The Window for Fibrinolysis. Frans Van de Werf, MD, PhD Leuven, Belgium

Quality assessment in STEMI patients: the Belgian STEMI registry :

DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Management of Cardiogenic shock. Prof. Christian JM Vrints

STREAM - ONE YEAR MORTALITY STRATEGIC REPERFUSION EARLY AFTER MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION. STREAM 1Y AHA 2013 P Sinnaeve

STEMI and Cardiogenic Shock. The rules and solution. Dave Kettles St Dominics and Frere Hospitals East London ZA

How to manage ACS patients with Comorbidities? Patients with Renal Failure

Mode of admission and its effect on quality indicators in Belgian STEMI patients

ACUTE CORONARY SYNDROME PCI IN THE ELDERLY

Patient and System Time Delay

Current Advances and Best Practices in Acute STEMI Management A pharmacoinvasive approach

Stem Cell 2017;8(2) Acute Coronary Syndrome Registries.

Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

ST-elevation myocardial infarctions (STEMIs)

ΓΙΑΚΔΡΚΙΓΙΚΗ ΠΡΟΠΔΛΑΗ ΚΑΙ ΑΓΓΔΙΟΠΛΑΣΙΚΗ: ΤΜΒΟΤΛΔ ΚΑΙ ΜΤΣΙΚΑ

NEBRASKA STEMI CONFERENCE 2015 Dr. Doug Kosmicki. 2013, American Heart Association

Regional STEMI Transfer Systems: the Mayo and NC RACE Experiences

The Swietokrzyskie System for the Optimal Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction

Coronary Catheterization and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in China 10-Year Results From the China PEACE-Retrospective CathPCI Study

4. Which survey program does your facility use to get your program designated by the state?

Controversies on Primary angioplasty in STEMI

The Role of DHMC as an ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction Receiving Center in a Regional STEMI Care Network:

Registry and benchmarking as tool for Quality assessment in STEMI patients

Quality Standards for Patients Treated by PCI. Peter F Ludman

The Strategic Reperfusion Early After STEMI study Implications for clinical practice

Clinical Lessons from BMC2-PCI

The Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE)

presenters 2010 Sameh Sabet Ain Shams University

Management of STEMI in era of Reperfusion. Eagles Peter Moyer, MD, MPH Medical Director Boston EMS, Fire and Police

How to do Primary Angioplasty. - Patients with Cardiogenic Shock

I have nothing to disclose.

ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI) Reperfusion Order Set

Decision for fibrinolysis or primary PCI in the prehospital phase

Prof. Adel El Etriby Ain Shams Faculty of Medicine

Trends in reperfusion therapy of STEMI patients in Belgium for the period

I have no financial relationships to disclose

Cardiogenic Shock and Initiatives to Reduce Mortality

Quality indicators for acute myocardial infarction: A position paper of the. Acute Cardiovascular Care Association

Timing of angiography for high- risk ACS

New Insights on Reperfusion Choices Implications of STREAM. Paul W Armstrong MD

William D. Salerno, M.D. Director, Coronary Care Unit Hackensack University Medical Center Clinical Associate Professor of Medicine, UMDNJ

ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction- Latest AHA recommendations

Beta-blockers in Patients with Mid-range Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction after AMI Improved Clinical Outcomes

Overcoming the Risk-Treatment Paradox in Non-STE ACS: It s Time! Christopher Granger, MD

Cardiology Department. Clinical Governance

The Burden & Management of Ischaemic Heart Disease in Kenya

A.K. Gitt, F. Towae, C. Juenger, A. Papp, R. Zahn, U. Zeymer, J. Senges For the STAR-Study-Group Herzzentrum Ludwigshafen, Germany

Critics of Thrombolytics: Is Pre-Hospital Clot-busting Actually a Bad Thing? David Persse, MD Houston Fire Department EMS

ACTION Registry GWTG Research and Publications Update

Press Conference. Presenter. Authors. Farzin Beygui

Xi Li, Jing Li, Frederick A Masoudi, John A Spertus, Zhenqiu Lin, Harlan M Krumholz, Lixin Jiang for the China PEACE Collaborative Group

THE CARDIOVASCULAR RISK FACTORS PROFILE PREDISPOSING TO HEART ATTACKS IN YOUNG WOMEN

Asian AMI Registry Session The 17 th Joint Meeting of Coronary Revascularization (JCR 2017) Busan, Korea Dec 8 th 2017

A Future for the IABP in Cardiogenic Shock? Holger Thiele Medical Clinic II (Cardiology/Angiology/Intensive Care) University of Lübeck, Germany

Risk Stratification of ACS Patients. Frans Van de Werf, MD, PhD University of Leuven, Belgium

University of Leipzig Heart Center

Clinical Seminar. Which Diabetic Patient is a Candidate for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention - European Perspective

DISCUSSION QUESTION - 1

Facilitated Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Acute Myocardial Infarction. Is it beneficial to patients?

Non merci! Revascularisation complète à la phase aigue de l infarctus? 8 e Cardiorun, La Réunion, 1 er octobre Gilles Rioufol, MD, PhD

Hospital Ranking Based on Discharge Prescriptions After Acute Myocardial Infarction: A National Assessment over Three Consecutive Years

Διάρκεια διπλής αντιαιμοπεταλιακής αγωγής. Νικόλαος Γ.Πατσουράκος Καρδιολόγος, Επιμελητής Α ΕΣΥ Τζάνειο Γενικό Νοσοκομείο Πειραιά

DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Acute Coronary Syndromes

ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction & Cardiogenic Shock. - What Should We Do?

S. CHASSAING4 P. DEQUENNE5

B. Paudel *, 1, K. Paudel* *Department of Medicine, Gandaki Medical College - Charak Hospital, Pokhara, Nepal 1

The PAIN Pathway for the Management of Acute Coronary Syndrome

Acute Coronary Syndrome

What oral antiplatelet therapy would you choose? a) ASA alone b) ASA + Clopidogrel c) ASA + Prasugrel d) ASA + Ticagrelor

Dashboard and Outcomes Report with Case Studies

Hot Topics in Cardiac Arrest. Should the patient go To the Cath Lab?

Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock

Patient Transfer. Mark de Belder The James Cook University Hospital Middlesbrough

Improving STEMI outcomes in Denmark. Michael Rahbek Schmidt, MD, PhD. Aarhus University Hospital Skejby Denmark

Stent For Life, Egypt A Success Story. Hany Ragy MD, FSCAI NHI, Cairo,

PPCI in STEMI. ESC at the 22nd Annual Conference of the Saudi Heart Association February 21th, 2011

INTRODUCTION. Key Words:

STEMI update. Vijay Krishnamoorthy M.D. Interventional Cardiology

Acute Coronary Syndrome (2019) ANEK KANOKSILP Central Chest Institute of Thailand

SHOULD A REGIONAL STEMI CENTRE ONLY OFFER PRIMARY PCI?

Effect of upstream clopidogrel treatment in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary PCI

Compliance of pharmacological treatment for non-st-elevation acute coronary syndromes with contemporary guidelines: influence on outcomes

What is new in the Treatment of STEMI? Malcolm R. Bell, MBBS Mayo Clinic Rochester, MN

STEMI 2014 YAHYA KIWAN. Consultant Cardiologist Head Of Cardiology Belhoul Specialty Hospital

Ticagrelor vs prasugrel in patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention

The ESC Registry on Chronic Ischemic Coronary Disease

STEMI Stents What next? Arshad Khan - HNE Clinical Research Fellow. Supervisors: Prof Boyle and Attia.

Li J, Li X, Ross JS, Wang Q, Wang Y, Desai NR, Xu X, Nuti SV, Masoudi FA, Spertus JA, Krumholz HM, Jiang L; China PEACE Collaborative Group.

Transcription:

Reperfusion Strategy in Europe: Temporal Trends in Performance Measures for Reperfusion Therapy in ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction F. Schiele 1, M. Hochadel 2, M. Tubaro 3, N. Meneveau 1, W. Wojakowski 4, M. Gierlotka 5, L. Polonski 5, JP. Bassand 1, K.A.A. Fox 6, A. Gitt 2 1 University Hospital Jean Minjoz, Besancon, France 2 Heart Attack Research Center, University of Heidelberg, Ludwigshafen, Germany 3 San Filippo Neri Hospital, Department of Cardiology, Rome, Italy 4 3rd Division of Cardiology, Medical University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland 5 Silesian Center for Heart Diseases, Medical University of Silesia, Zabrze, Poland 6 Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom On behalf of Euro Heart Survey-ACS III investigators No Conflict of Interest to Declare

Measuring Quality of Care Assessment of the quality of care: integral part of modern health care. Acute STEMI is a typical clinical situation where : Quality of management has an important impact on outcomes. RDZ studies have demonstrated clinical benefit of treatments. Guidelines provide Class IA recommendations. Performance Measures (PM): method to assess the quality of care. Since 2006, ACC/AHA have defined PM for STEMI and reperfusion Use of reperfusion in eligible patients. Choice of strategy : fibrinolysis (FL) or primary PCI (P-PCI) Time to reperfusion : door to needle, door to balloon times So far, PM for reperfusion are poorly used in European Centres. Aim of the study: to assess Performance Measures for reperfusion therapy in Europe, and to examine temporal trends in PM over 4 periods of 6 months (2006-2008). Massoudi, JACC 2006;52:2101

Euro Heart Survey ACS programme The EHS is an international clinical research programme aiming to provide a better understanding of medical practice based on observational data, collected with robust methodological procedures. EHS ACS in 2000 : 10484 ACS patients, 4431 STEMI EHS ACS II in 2004 : 6385 ACS patients, 3004 STEMI; EHS ACS III : October 2006 to November 2008 Centre participation on voluntary basis Inclusion of consecutive patients admitted the first week /month Only direct admissions (no transferred patients) Use of the CARDS variables (250 variables/patient) Self explanatory CRF provided by EHS team at the ESC http://escardio.org/guidelines-surveys/ehs Hasdai, Mandelzweig, Eur Heart Eur J Heart 2002;23:1190 J 2006;

10 centres 1170 pts 2 centres 297 pts 5 centres 1599 pts 2 centres 66 pts 16 centres 1725 pts 2 centres 86 pts Participating centres 9 centres 3817 pts 9 centres 107 pts 2 centres 70 pts West : 2045 STEMI, 120 pts/ centre High volume centre : 36% Cath lab on site: 100% 9 centres 313 pts Mediterranean : 2425 STEMI, 60 pts/ centre High volume centre : 28% Cath lab on site: 64% Central : 3185 STEMI, 82 pts/ centre High volume centre : 14% Cath lab on site: 58% 1 centre 15 pts 1 centre 12 pts 2 centres 125 pts 3 centres 201 pts 3 centres 30 pts 9 centres 891 pts 5 centres 662 pts 2 centres 61 pts 3 centres 66 pts 1 centre 15 pts 2 centres 155 pts

Definition of PM (1) Rate of patients with reperfusion therapy, among those eligible (STEMI patients admitted<12h, without recorded contra indication for reperfusion) (2) Rate of use of P-PCI and (3) of FL (4) Rate and Type of reperfusion among PCI-preferred patients: patients with a contra-indication for fibrinolysis, admitted >4 hours after onset of symptoms, with cardiogenic shock or with Killip class >3 (5) Door to needle time (admission to administration of FL) (6) Rate of patients with FL<30 min among those reperfused by FL (7) Door to artery time (admission to artery puncture) (8) Rate of patients with P-PCI<90 min among reperfused by P-PCI (9) Rate of patients timely reperfused = by primary PCI (door to artery time<90 min) or by FL (door to needle time <30 min).

Population 19205 Patients 7655 STEMI 11550 NSTEMI-ACS Period #1 N=1920 Period #2 N=1912 Period #3 N=1913 Period #4 N=1910 No ECG criteria Admitted >12h or CI Eligible Reperfusion Time information 75(3.9%) 52(2.7%) 64(3.3%) 49(2.6%) 225(11.7%) 231(12.1%) 231(12.1%) 247(12.9%) 1620(84.3%) 1629(85.2%) 1618(84.5%) 1614(84.5%) 98% 100% 100% 100%

Patient characteristics Variables Period 1 N=1920 Period 2 N=1912 Period 3 N=1913 Period 4 N=1910 P (trend) Age 63(13) 64(13) 64(13) 64(13) 0.21** Elderly ( 75) 434 (22%) 446 (23%) 455 (24%) 448 (24%) 0.29* Male Gender 1374(71%) 1364(71%) 1363(71%) 1380(72%) 0.67* Diabetes 385(20%) 416(22%) 484(25%) 438(23%) 0.005* Admission 135(29) 133(28) 134(27) 133(28) 0.18** SBP (mmhg) Creatinine 88[75;106 88[76;106 88[75;106 88[75;106 0.41** Killip Class>2 188(9.8%) 157(8.2%) 125(6.5%) 135(7.1%) <0.001* GRACE score 152(40) 154(39) 153(37) 156(39) 0.15** *Cochran Armitage test **Jonckheere Terpstra test

PM for reperfusion 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 84.4% 85.2 % 84.6% 84.5% 77.2% 80.7% 82.5% 81.7% Period 1 Period 2 Period 3 Period 4 Eligible; p=0.95 Reperfusion; p=0.0007 P-PCI; p<0.0001 FL; p<0.0001 P-PCI<90; p<0.0001 FL<30; p=0.0081 Timely Rep; p<0.0001 P-PCI/PCI pref, p=0.009 Cochran Armitage test

PM for reperfusion 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 51.7% 60.0 % 62.6% 64.0% 25.4% 20.7% 19.9% 17.3% Period 1 Period 2 Period 3 Period 4 Eligible; p=0.95 Reperfusion; p=0.0007 P-PCI; p<0.0001 FL; p<0.0001 P-PCI<90; p<0.0001 FL<30; p=0.0081 Timely Rep; p<0.0001 P-PCI/PCI pref, p=0.009 Cochran Armitage test

PM for reperfusion 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 72.3% 72.3% 76.2% 80.4% 61.7% 65.0% 67.4% 71.1% 68.8% 70.4% 74.1% 78.1% Period 1 Period 2 Period 3 Period 4 Eligible; p=0.95 Reperfusion; p=0.0007 P-PCI; p<0.0001 FL; p<0.0001 P-PCI<90; p<0.0001 FL<30; p=0.0081 Timely Rep; p<0.0001 P-PCI/PCI pref, p=0.009 Cochran Armitage test

Trends in times to reperfusion Time (min) 300 250 200 Door to needle: 20 [10; 34 to 15 [-37; 30 Onset to needle: 150 [90; 240 to 130 [90; 210 p=0.0011 for trend p=0.0080 for trend 150 100 20 20 15 15 50 0 FL FL FL FL Period 1 Period 2 Period 3 Period 4 Onset to Door Door to Needle Jonckheere-Terpstra test

Trends in times to reperfusion Time (min) Door to artery: 60 [27; 119 to 45 [26; 84 p<0.0011 for trend 300 Onset to artery: 240 [155; 290 to 230 [145; 386 p=0.056 for trend 250 200 150 100 60 53 20 20 50 45 15 15 50 0 FL P_PCI FL P-PCI FL P-PCI FL P-PCI Period 1 Period 2 Period 3 Period 4 Onset to Door Door to Needle Door to Artery Jonckherre-Terpstra test

Results: In-Hospital events 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 13.8 11.6 11 10.4 8.1 7.3 6.5 6.6 Period 1 Period 2 Period 3 Period 4 Combined, p=0.006 Death, p=0.047 Major Bleed, p=0.36 Re-infarction, p<0.001 Stroke; p=0.49 Cochran Armitage test

Interactions : timely reperfusion (FL<30min or PPCI<90min) Odds Lower Upper ratio limit limit p-value p-value * Interaction Odds ratio and 95% CI Male 1.330 1.200 1.474 0.000 Female 1.410 1.210 1.643 0.000 Elderly 1.470 1.230 1.757 0.000 Non Elderly 1.340 1.210 1.484 0.000 Diabetes 1.430 1.190 1.718 0.000 No Diabetes 1.370 1.240 1.514 0.000 Off Hours Admission 1.420 1.270 1.588 0.000 Working Hours 1.270 1.110 1.453 0.001 Low Volume centre 1.430 1.300 1.573 0.000 High volume centre 1.530 1.260 1.858 0.000 Cath lab on site 1.340 1.270 1.414 0.000 No cath lab on site 1.500 1.190 1.891 0.001 University centre 1.350 1.220 1.494 0.000 Non University 1.360 1.160 1.594 0.000 Centres >10 pts/period 1.320 1.200 1.452 0.000 Centres <10pts/period 0.810 0.650 1.009 0.061 Cardio on site 24/7 1.140 1.000 1.300 0.050 No cardio on site 24/7 1.780 1.480 2.141 0.000 0.59 0.44 0.72 0.29 0.63 0.48 0.97 0.006 0.76 0.75 1 1.5 2 Less in 2007-2008 More in 2007-2008 *Breslow Day test

Discussion - Limitations In EHS ACS III, all PM for reperfusion were comparable to those reported in US and international registries (NRMI, GRACE). Reperfusion rates have increased gradually over the course of the 3 EHS ACS: 55.3% in 2000, 63.9% in 2004, 81.1% in 2008. 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Reperfusion P-PCI FL

Discussion - Limitations In EHS ACS III, all PM for reperfusion were comparable to those reported in US and international registries (NRMI, GRACE). Reperfusion rates have increased gradually over the course of the 3 EHS ACS: 55.3% in 2000, 63.9% in 2004, 81.1% in 2008. Changes in all PM with parallel decrease in in-hospital mortality are consistent with an increase in Quality of the Management. Extent of the temporal changes: comparable to that observed with specific programs (D2B campaign, RACE, GWTG). Limitations: Results not applicable for transferred patients. Door to artery vs door to balloon Selection of patients? GRACE risk score and in-hospital mortality rate consistent with a non selected population. Selection of participating centres motivated by the quality of care?

Conclusions Euro Heart Survey ACS III provides reassuring news : Average reperfusion rate among eligible patients : 80.4% Door to needle time = 20 min [IQR -15; 31 Door to artery time = 50 min [IQR 27; 100 Between October 2006 and November 2008, we observed a significant and rapid improvement in the rate, modalities and time to reperfusion. Timely reperfusion not achieved in 25%. Is it time for ESC to define PM in the management of ACS? Ongoing EHS ACS Snapshot will continue to assess the management of ACS. http://eurheartj.oxfordjournals.org