Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Position Statement From the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), and the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP).

The worldwide pandemic caused by the novel acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 has resulted in a new and lethal disease termed coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). Although there is an association between cardiovascular disease and COVID-19, the majority of patients who need cardiovascular care for the management of ischemic heart disease may not be infected with this novel coronavirus. The objective of this document is to provide recommendations for a systematic approach for the care of patients with an acute myocardial infarction (AMI) during the COVID-19 pandemic. There is a recognition of two major challenges in providing recommendations for AMI care in the COVID-19 era. Cardiovascular manifestations of COVID-19 are complex with patients presenting with AMI, myocarditis simulating an ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) presentation, stress cardiomyopathy, non-ischemic cardiomyopathy, coronary spasm, or nonspecific myocardial injury, and the prevalence of COVID-19 disease in the U.S. population remains unknown with risk of asymptomatic spread. This document addresses the care of these patients focusing on 1) the varied clinical presentations; 2) appropriate personal protection equipment (PPE) for health care workers; 3) role of the Emergency Department, Emergency Medical System and the Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory; and 4) Regional STEMI systems of care. During the COVID-19 pandemic, primary PCI remains the standard of care for STEMI patients at PCI capable hospitals when it can be provided in a timely fashion, with an expert team outfitted with PPE in a dedicated CCL room. A fibrinolysis-based strategy may be entertained at non-PCI capable referral hospitals or in specific situations where primary PCI cannot be executed or is not deemed the best option.

Management of acute myocardial infarction during the COVID-19 pandemic: A Consensus Statement from the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), and the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP).

The worldwide pandemic caused by the novel acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 has resulted in a new and lethal disease termed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Although there is an association between cardiovascular disease and COVID-19, the majority of patients who need cardiovascular care for the management of ischemic heart disease may not be infected with this novel coronavirus. The objective of this document is to provide recommendations for a systematic approach for the care of patients with an acute myocardial infarction (AMI) during the COVID-19 pandemic. There is a recognition of two major challenges in providing recommendations for AMI care in the COVID-19 era. Cardiovascular manifestations of COVID-19 are complex with patients presenting with AMI, myocarditis simulating an ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) presentation, stress cardiomyopathy, non-ischemic cardiomyopathy, coronary spasm, or nonspecific myocardial injury, and the prevalence of COVID-19 disease in the US population remains unknown with risk of asymptomatic spread. This document addresses the care of these patients focusing on (a) varied clinical presentations; (b) appropriate personal protection equipment (PPE) for health care workers; (c) the roles of the emergency department, emergency medical system, and the cardiac catheterization laboratory (CCL); and (4) regional STEMI systems of care. During the COVID-19 pandemic, primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains the standard of care for STEMI patients at PCI-capable hospitals when it can be provided in a timely manner, with an expert team outfitted with PPE in a dedicated CCL room. A fibrinolysis-based strategy may be entertained at non-PCI-capable referral hospitals or in specific situations where primary PCI cannot be executed or is not deemed the best option.

Erratum: This Article Corrects: "Trends in Regionalization of Care for ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction".

[This corrects the article on p. 1010 in vol. 18, PMID: 29085531.].

Trends in Regionalization of Care for ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction.

INTRODUCTION: California has led successful regionalized efforts for several time-critical medical conditions, including ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), but no specific mandated protocols exist to define regionalization of care. We aimed to study the trends in regionalization of care for STEMI patients in the state of California and to examine the differences in patient demographic, hospital, and county trends. METHODS: Using survey responses collected from all California emergency medical services (EMS) agencies, we developed four categories - no, partial, substantial, and complete regionalization - to capture prehospital and inter-hospital components of regionalization in each EMS agency's jurisdiction between 2005-2014. We linked the survey responses to 2006 California non-public hospital discharge data to study the patient distribution at baseline. RESULTS: STEMI regionalization-of-care networks steadily developed across California. Only 14% of counties were regionalized in 2006, accounting for 42% of California's STEMI patient population, but over half of these counties, representing 86% of California's STEMI patient population, reached complete regionalization in 2014. We did not find any dramatic differences in underlying patient characteristics based on regionalization status; however, differences in hospital characteristics were relatively substantial. CONCLUSION: Potential barriers to achieving regionalization included competition, hospital ownership, population density, and financial challenges. Minimal differences in patient characteristics can establish that patient differences unlikely played any role in influencing earlier or later regionalization and can provide a framework for future analyses evaluating the impact of regionalization on patient outcomes.

Association of Rapid Care Process Implementation on Reperfusion Times Across Multiple ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Networks.

BACKGROUND: The Mission: Lifeline STEMI Systems Accelerator program, implemented in 16 US metropolitan regions, resulted in more patients receiving timely reperfusion. We assessed whether implementing key care processes was associated with system performance improvement. METHODS AND RESULTS: Hospitals (n=167 with 23 498 ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients) were surveyed before (March 2012) and after (July 2014) program intervention. Data were merged with patient-level clinical data over the same period. For reperfusion, hospitals were grouped by whether a specific process of care was implemented, preexisting, or never implemented. Uptake of 4 key care processes increased after intervention: prehospital catheterization laboratory activation (62%-91%; P<0.001), single call transfer protocol from an outside facility (45%-70%; P<0.001), and emergency department bypass for emergency medical services direct presenters (48%-59%; P=0.002) and transfers (56%-79%; P=0.001). There were significant differences in median first medical contact-to-device times among groups implementing prehospital activation (88 minutes implementers versus 89 minutes preexisting versus 98 minutes nonimplementers; P<0.001 for comparisons). Similarly, patients treated at hospitals implementing single call transfer protocols had shorter median first medical contact-to-device times (112 versus 128 versus 152 minutes; P<0.001). Emergency department bypass was also associated with shorter median first medical contact-to-device times for emergency medical services direct presenters (84 versus 88 versus 94 minutes; P<0.001) and transfers (123 versus 127 versus 167 minutes; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The Accelerator program increased uptake of key care processes, which were associated with improved system performance. These findings support efforts to implement regional ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction networks focused on prehospital catheterization laboratory activation, single call transfer protocols, and emergency department bypass.

A Decade of Progress in Regional ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Systems of Care: A Tale of Two Cities.

Over the past 20 years, care for patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) has rapidly evolved, not just in terms of how patients are treated, but where patients are treated. The advent of regional STEMI systems of care has decreased the number of "eligible but untreated" patients while improving access to primary percutaneous coronary intervention for patients. These regional STEMI systems of care have consistently demonstrated that rapid transport of STEMI patients is safe and effective, and have shown marked improvements in a variety of clinical outcomes. However, no two STEMI systems are alike, and each must be tailored to the unique geographic, political, and socioeconomic challenges of the region. This article takes an in-depth look at two of the earliest STEMI systems within the United States: the Minneapolis Heart Institute and the Los Angeles County STEMI receiving network.

Regional Systems of Care Demonstration Project: American Heart Association Mission: Lifeline STEMI Systems Accelerator.

BACKGROUND: Up to 50% of patients fail to meet ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) guideline goals recommending a first medical contact-to-device time of <90 minutes for patients directly presenting to percutaneous coronary intervention-capable hospitals and <120 minutes for transferred patients. We sought to increase the proportion of patients treated within guideline goals by organizing coordinated regional reperfusion plans. METHODS: We established leadership teams, coordinated protocols, and provided regular feedback for 484 hospitals and 1253 emergency medical services (EMS) agencies in 16 regions across the United States. RESULTS: Between July 2012 and December 2013, 23 809 patients presented with acute STEMI (direct to percutaneous coronary intervention hospital: 11 765 EMS transported and 6502 self-transported; 5542 transferred). EMS-transported patients differed from self-transported patients in symptom onset to first medical contact time (median, 47 versus 114 minutes), incidence of cardiac arrest (10% versus 3%), shock on admission (11% versus 3%), and in-hospital mortality (8% versus 3%; P<0.001 for all comparisons). There was a significant increase in the proportion of patients meeting guideline goals of first medical contact-to-device time, including those directly presenting via EMS (50% to 55%; P<0.001) and transferred patients (44%-48%; P=0.002). Despite regional variability, the greatest gains occurred among patients in the 5 most improved regions, increasing from 45% to 57% (direct EMS; P<0.001) and 38% to 50% (transfers; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This Mission: Lifeline STEMI Systems Accelerator demonstration project represents the largest national effort to organize regional STEMI care. By focusing on first medical contact-to-device time, coordinated treatment protocols, and regional data collection and reporting, we were able to increase significantly the proportion of patients treated within guideline goals.

A Novel Survey Tool to Quantify the Degree and Duration of STEMI Regionalization Across California.

INTRODUCTION: California has been a global leader in regionalization efforts for time-critical medical conditions. A total of 33 local emergency medical service agencies (LEMSAs) exist, providing an organized EMS framework across the state for almost 40 years. We sought to develop a survey tool to quantify the degree and duration of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) regionalization over the last decade in California. METHODS: The project started with the development of an 8-question survey tool via a multi-disciplinary expert consensus process. Next, the survey tool was distributed at the annual meeting of administrators and medical directors of California LEMSAs to get responses valid through December, 2014. The first scoring approach was the Total Regionalization Score (TRS) and used answers from all 8 questions. The second approach was called the Core Score, and it focused on only 4 survey questions by assuming that the designation of STEMI Receiving Centers must have occurred at the beginning of any LEMSA's regionalization effort. Scores were ranked and grouped into tertiles. RESULTS: All 33 LEMSAs in California participated in this survey. The TRS ranged from 15 to 162. The Core Score range was much narrower, from 2 to 30. In comparing TRS and Core Score rankings, the top-tertiles were quite similar. More rank variation occurred between mid- and low-tertiles. CONCLUSION: This study evaluated the degree and duration of STEMI network regionalization from 2004 to 2014 in California, and ranked 33 LEMSAs into tertiles based upon their TRS and their Core Score. Successful application of the 8-item survey and ranking strategies across California suggests that this approach can be used to assess regionalization in other states or countries around the world.

False Activations for ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction.

First-medical-contact-to-device (FMC2D) times have improved over the past decade, as have clinical outcomes for patients presenting with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). However, with improvements in FMC2D times, false activation of the cardiac catheterization laboratory (CCL) has become a challenging problem. The authors define false activation as any patient who does not warrant emergent coronary angiography for STEMI. In addition to clinical outcome measures for these patients, STEMI systems should collect data regarding the total number of CCL activations, the total number of emergency coronary angiograms, and the number revascularization procedures performed.

Emergency department bypass for ST-Segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients identified with a prehospital electrocardiogram: a report from the American Heart Association Mission: Lifeline program.

BACKGROUND: For patients identified before hospital arrival with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, bypassing the emergency department (ED) with direct transport to the catheterization laboratory may shorten reperfusion times. METHODS AND RESULTS: We studied 12 581 ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients identified with a prehospital ECG treated at 371 primary percutaneous coronary intervention-capable US hospitals participating in the Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network Registry-Get With The Guidelines, including those participating in the American Heart Association Mission: Lifeline program from 2008 to 2011. Reperfusion times with primary percutaneous coronary intervention and in-hospital mortality rates were compared between patients undergoing ED evaluation and those bypassing the ED. ED bypass occurred in 1316 patients (10.5%). These patients had a lower frequency of heart failure and shock on presentation and nonsystem reasons for delay in percutaneous coronary intervention. ED bypass occurred more frequently during working hours compared with off-hours (18.3% versus 4.3%); ED bypass rate varied significantly across hospitals (median, 3.3%; range, 0%-71%). First medical contact to device activation time was shorter (median, 68 minutes [interquartile range, 54-85 minutes] versus 88 minutes [interquartile range, 73-106 minutes]; P<0.0001) and achieved within 90 minutes more frequently (80.7% versus 53.7%; P<0.0001) with ED bypass. The unadjusted in-hospital mortality rate was lower among ED bypass patients (2.7% versus 4.1%; P=0.01), but the adjusted mortality risk was similar (adjusted odds ratio, 0.69; 95% confidence interval, 0.45-1.03; P=0.07). CONCLUSIONS: Among ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients identified with a prehospital ECG, the rate of ED bypass varied significantly across US hospitals, but ED bypass occurred infrequently and was mostly isolated to working hours. Because ED bypass was associated with shorter reperfusion times and numerically lower mortality rates, further exploration of and advocacy for the implementation of this process appear warranted.

The National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) Data Quality Brief: the NCDR Data Quality Program in 2012.

OBJECTIVES: The National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) developed the Data Quality Program to meet the objectives of ensuring the completeness, consistency, and accuracy of data submitted to the observational clinical registries. The Data Quality Program consists of 3 main components: 1) a data quality report; 2) a set of internal quality assurance protocols; and 3) a yearly data audit program. BACKGROUND: Since its inception in 1997, the NCDR has been the basis for the development of performance and quality metrics, site-level quality improvement programs, and peer-reviewed health outcomes research. METHODS: Before inclusion in the registry, data are filtered through the registry-specific algorithms that require predetermined levels of completeness and consistency for submitted data fields as part of the data quality report. Internal quality assurance protocols enforce data standards before reporting. Within each registry, 300 to 625 records are audited annually in 25 randomly identified sites (i.e., 12 to 25 records per audited site). RESULTS: In the 2010 audits, the participant average raw accuracy of data abstraction for the CathPCI Registry, ICD Registry, and ACTION Registry-GWTG were, respectively, 93.1% (range, 89.4% minimum, 97.4% maximum), 91.2% (range, 83.7% minimum, 95.7% maximum), and 89.7.% (range, 85% minimum, 95% maximum). CONCLUSIONS: The 2010 audits provided evidence that many fields in the NCDR accurately represent the data from the medical charts. The American College of Cardiology Foundation is undertaking a series of initiatives aimed at creating a quality assurance rapid learning system, which, when complete, will monitor, evaluate, and improve data quality.

Systems of care for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction: a report From the American Heart Association's Mission: Lifeline.

BACKGROUND: National guidelines call for participation in systems to rapidly diagnose and treat ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). In order to characterize currently implemented STEMI reperfusion systems and identify practices common to system organization, the American Heart Association surveyed existing systems throughout the United States. METHODS AND RESULTS: A STEMI system was defined as an integrated group of separate entities focused on reperfusion therapy for STEMI within a geographic region that included at least 1 hospital that performs percutaneous coronary intervention and at least 1 emergency medical service agency. Systems meeting this definition were invited to participate in a survey of 42 questions based on expert panel opinion and knowledge of existing systems. Data were collected through the American Heart Association Mission: Lifeline website. Between April 2008 and January 2010, 381 unique systems involving 899 percutaneous coronary intervention hospitals in 47 states responded to the survey, of which 255 systems (67%) involved urban regions. The predominant funding sources for STEMI systems were percutaneous coronary intervention hospitals (n = 320, 84%) and /or cardiology practices (n = 88, 23%). Predominant system characteristics identified by the survey included: STEMI patient acceptance at percutaneous coronary intervention hospital regardless of bed availability (N = 346, 97%); single phone call activation of catheterization laboratory (N = 335, 92%); emergency department physician activation of laboratory without cardiology consultation (N = 318, 87%); data registry participation (N = 311, 84%); and prehospital activation of the laboratory through emergency department notification without cardiology notification (N = 297, 78%). The most common barriers to system implementation were hospital (n = 139, 37%) and cardiology group competition (n = 81, 21%) and emergency medical services transport and finances (n = 99, 26%). CONCLUSIONS: This survey broadly describes the organizational characteristics of collaborative efforts by hospitals and emergency medical services to provide timely reperfusion in the United States. These findings serve as a benchmark for existing systems and should help guide healthcare teams in the process of organizing care for patients with STEMI.

Correlation between index electrocardiographic patterns and pre-intervention angiographic findings: insights from the HORIZONS-AMI trial.

OBJECTIVES: To improve ECG interpretation accuracy in patients with chest pain prior to activation of the cardiac catheterization laboratory for primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI). BACKGROUND: Despite current guideline-based ECG criteria, challenges remain in optimizing the rate of appropriate catheterization laboratory activation. METHODS: The HORIZONS-AMI trial enrolled 3,602 patients with chest pain consistent with myocardial infarction (MI). ECG and angiographic core laboratory databases were analyzed for correlation between the qualifying study ECG and the baseline coronary angiogram. RESULTS: LAD occlusion manifested in >80% of cases as ST-segment elevation in leads V2 and V3, while the culprit vessel was the RCA and LCx in 75 and 25% of cases, respectively, for inferior MI ECG patterns. The study threshold of ≥ 1.0 mm ST-segment elevation in ≥ 2 contiguous ECG leads was not met in 189 (5.3%) patients. When stratified by culprit artery, the prevalence of reciprocal ST-segment depression ranged from 24 to 88%, being least common for lesions in the mid- and distal left anterior descending artery. Despite study eligibility, no posterior MIs were enrolled. Only 36 LBBB cases were identified (25% of whom did not undergo PCI), and 5 of 11 left main coronary occlusions (45%) had ST-segment elevation in lead aVR. CONCLUSIONS: The present study confirms prior ischemic ECG findings predicted by vectorcardiography, validates certain ECG patterns as reliable surrogate markers for acute coronary occlusion, and provides novel insights correlating index ECG ischemic changes and pre-intervention coronary angiography. These results may enhance the rate of appropriate catheterization laboratory activation. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

An open, interoperable, and scalable prehospital information technology network architecture.

Some of the most intractable challenges in prehospital medicine include response time optimization, inefficiencies at the emergency medical services (EMS)-emergency department (ED) interface, and the ability to correlate field interventions with patient outcomes. Information technology (IT) can address these and other concerns by ensuring that system and patient information is received when and where it is needed, is fully integrated with prior and subsequent patient information, and is securely archived. Some EMS agencies have begun adopting information technologies, such as wireless transmission of 12-lead electrocardiograms, but few agencies have developed a comprehensive plan for management of their prehospital information and integration with other electronic medical records. This perspective article highlights the challenges and limitations of integrating IT elements without a strategic plan, and proposes an open, interoperable, and scalable prehospital information technology (PHIT) architecture. The two core components of this PHIT architecture are 1) routers with broadband network connectivity to share data between ambulance devices and EMS system information services and 2) an electronic patient care report to organize and archive all electronic prehospital data. To successfully implement this comprehensive PHIT architecture, data and technology requirements must be based on best available evidence, and the system must adhere to health data standards as well as privacy and security regulations. Recent federal legislation prioritizing health information technology may position federal agencies to help design and fund PHIT architectures.

The time dependence of antithrombin initiation in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes: subgroup analysis from the ACUITY trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Antithrombins are among standard treatment agents for patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes. We aimed to determine the association between time from emergency department (ED) presentation to treatment with an antithrombin and adverse cardiac events. METHODS: The study cohort was a subgroup of the Acute Catheterization and Urgent Intervention Triage Strategy (ACUITY) trial, enrolled from March 1, 2005, to December 5, 2005. The ACUITY trial enrolled patients with moderate- and high-risk non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes and who were undergoing an early invasive strategy (<72 hours from randomization). All patients received an antithrombin (unfractionated heparin, low-molecular-weight heparin, or bivalirudin), in addition to other agents. A formal ED case report form was introduced in March 2005. Time from presentation to antithrombin initiation was evaluated as a continuous variable in hours. The endpoints were defined as major ischemic events (death, myocardial infarction, unplanned revascularization) or major bleeding within 30 days, or inhospital major bleeding. Logistic regression was used to adjust for demographics, severity of disease, comorbidities, and treatment differences. RESULTS: Of the 2,722 patients enrolled with an ED case report form, complete time data were available in 2,632 (96%). Median time to antithrombin administration was 4.87 hours (interquartile range 2.67 to 9.83). After multivariable analysis, there was no association of major ischemic events with log time (hours) to antithrombin treatment (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.97 to 1.01). There was an increase in major bleeding at 30 days and inhospital major bleeding complications with longer log time (hours) to antithrombin initiation (adjusted OR 1.44, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.80; OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.83, respectively). CONCLUSION: In this study of patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes who were undergoing an early invasive management strategy, we were unable to demonstrate an association between adverse ischemic outcomes with the timing of antithrombin administration. However, there was an increase in bleeding outcomes as time to antithrombin administration increased.