RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Emergency Medical Services (EMS) studies have shown that prehospital risk stratification and triage decisions in patients with suspected non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) can be improved using clinical risk scores with point-of-care (POC) troponin. In current EMS studies, three different clinical risk scores are used in patients suspected of NSTE-ACS: the prehospital History, ECG, Age, Risk and Troponin (preHEART) score, History, ECG, Age, Risk and Troponin (HEART) score and Troponin-only Manchester Acute Coronary Syndromes (T-MACS). The preHEART score lacks external validation and there exists no prospective comparative analysis of the different risk scores within the prehospital setting. The aim of this analysis is to externally validate the preHEART score and compare the diagnostic performance of the these three clinical risk scores and POC-troponin. METHODS: Prespecified analysis from a prospective, multicentre, cohort study in patients with suspected NSTE-ACS who were transported to an ED between April 2021 and December 2022 in the Netherlands. Risk stratification is performed by EMS personnel using preHEART, HEART, T-MACS and POC-troponin. The primary end point was the hospital diagnosis of NSTE-ACS. The diagnostic performance was expressed as area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC), sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV) and positive predictive value (PPV). RESULTS: A total of 823 patients were included for external validation of the preHEART score, final hospital diagnosis of NSTE-ACS was made in 29% (n=235). The preHEART score classified 27% as low risk, with a sensitivity of 92.8% (95% CI 88.7 to 95.7) and NPV of 92.3% (95% CI 88.3 to 95.1). The preHEART classified 9% of the patients as high risk, with a specificity of 98.5% (95% CI 97.1 to 99.3) and PPV of 87.7% (95% CI 78.3 to 93.4). Data for comparing clinical risk scores and POC-troponin were available in 316 patients. No difference was found between the preHEART score and HEART score (AUROC 0.83 (95% CI 0.78 to 0.87) vs AUROC 0.80 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.85), p=0.19), and both were superior compared with T-MACS (AUROC 0.72 (95% CI 0.66 to 0.79), p≤0.001 and p=0.03, respectively) and POC-troponin measurement alone (AUROC 0.71 (95% CI 0.64 to 0.78), p<0.001 and p=0.01, respectively). CONCLUSION: On external validation, the preHEART demonstrates good overall diagnostic performance as a prehospital risk stratification tool. Both the preHEART and HEART scores have better overall diagnostic performance compared with T-MACS and sole POC-troponin measurement. These data support the implementation of clinical risk scores in prehospital clinical pathways. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05243485.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: While experimental data suggest that selective intracoronary hypothermia decreases infarct size, studies in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) are lacking. AIMS: We investigated the efficacy of selective intracoronary hypothermia during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) to decrease infarct size in patients with STEMI. METHODS: In this multicentre randomised controlled trial, 200 patients with large anterior wall STEMI were randomised 1:1 to selective intracoronary hypothermia during primary PCI or primary PCI alone. Using an over-the-wire balloon catheter for infusion of cold saline and a pressure-temperature wire to monitor the intracoronary temperature, the anterior myocardium distal to the occlusion was selectively cooled to 30-33°C for 7-10 minutes before reperfusion (occlusion phase), immediately followed by 10 minutes of cooling after reperfusion (reperfusion phase). The primary endpoint was infarct size as a percentage of left ventricular mass on cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging after 3 months. RESULTS: Selective intracoronary hypothermia was performed in 94/100 patients randomised to cooling. Distal coronary temperature decreased by 6°C within 43 seconds (interquartile range [IQR] 18-113). The median duration of the occlusion phase and reperfusion phase were 8.2 minutes (IQR 7.2-9.0) and 9.1 minutes (IQR 8.2-10.0), respectively. The infarct size at 3 months was 23.1±12.5% in the selective intracoronary hypothermia group and 21.6±12.2% in the primary PCI alone group (p=0.43). The left ventricular ejection fraction at 3 months in each group were 49.1±10.2% and 50.1±10.4%, respectively (p=0.53). CONCLUSIONS: Selective intracoronary hypothermia during primary PCI in patients with anterior wall STEMI was feasible and safe but did not decrease infarct size compared with standard primary PCI. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03447834).
Assuntos
Hipotermia Induzida , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea , Infarto do Miocárdio com Supradesnível do Segmento ST , Humanos , Masculino , Hipotermia Induzida/métodos , Feminino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea/métodos , Idoso , Infarto do Miocárdio com Supradesnível do Segmento ST/terapia , Infarto do Miocárdio com Supradesnível do Segmento ST/fisiopatologia , Infarto do Miocárdio com Supradesnível do Segmento ST/diagnóstico por imagem , Infarto do Miocárdio com Supradesnível do Segmento ST/cirurgia , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: In 5%-25% of non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) patients, coronary angiography reveals no obstructive coronary arteries (MINOCA). Coronary microvascular disease (CMD) is a potential causal pathophysiological mechanism in these patients and can be diagnosed by continuous thermodilution assessment. Recently, the microvascular resistance reserve (MRR) has been introduced as a novel index to assess the vasodilatory capacity of the microcirculation. However, continuous thermodilution and MRR have never been investigated in the acute setting in MINOCA patients and invasive assessment of the microcirculation in these patients are currently lacking. AIMS: The objectives of the study were to investigate the incidence of CMD (MRR ≤ 2.7) in patients with MINOCA and to evaluate the feasibility and safety of continuous thermodilution-based assessment during index coronary angiography in the acute setting. METHODS: This study was a prospective, observational, pilot study investigating coronary physiology in the acute setting in MINOCA patients. Patients admitted with a diagnosis of NSTE-ACS were eligible for inclusion. RESULTS: In total, 19 MINOCA patients were included in this analysis; the mean age was 70 ± 9 years, and 79% were females. CMD was present in 6 patients (32%). Qrest was significantly higher in the MRR ≤ 2.7 group compared to the MRR > 2.7 group (0.076 [0.057-0.100] vs. 0.049 [0.044-0.071] L/min, p = 0.03). Rµ,rest was significantly lower in the MRR ≤ 2.7 group compared to the MRR > 2.7 group (1083 [710-1510] vs. 1563 [1298-1970] WU, p = 0.04). No periprocedural complications or hemodynamic instability have occurred during continuous thermodilution assessment during the index coronary angiography. CONCLUSION: In patients admitted for MINOCA undergoing immediate coronary angiography, continuous thermodilution assessment and MRR are feasible and safe in the acute setting, and evidence of functional CMD could be observed in one-third of the MINOCA patients.
Assuntos
Síndrome Coronariana Aguda , Angiografia Coronária , Circulação Coronária , Estudos de Viabilidade , Microcirculação , Valor Preditivo dos Testes , Termodiluição , Resistência Vascular , Humanos , Projetos Piloto , Feminino , Masculino , Idoso , Estudos Prospectivos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Síndrome Coronariana Aguda/fisiopatologia , Síndrome Coronariana Aguda/diagnóstico por imagem , Síndrome Coronariana Aguda/terapia , Vasos Coronários/fisiopatologia , Vasos Coronários/diagnóstico por imagem , Cateterismo Cardíaco , Infarto do Miocárdio sem Supradesnível do Segmento ST/fisiopatologia , Infarto do Miocárdio sem Supradesnível do Segmento ST/diagnóstico por imagem , Infarto do Miocárdio sem Supradesnível do Segmento ST/terapia , Vasodilatação , Idoso de 80 Anos ou maisRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The differences in outcomes and process parameters for NSTEMI patients who are directly admitted to an intervention centre and patients who are first admitted to a general centre are largely unknown. HYPOTHESIS: There are differences in process indicators, but not for clinical outcomes, for NSTEMI who are directly admitted to an intervention centre and patients who are first admitted to a general centre. METHODS: We aim to compare process indicators, costs and clinical outcomes of non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) patients stratified by center of first presentation and revascularisation strategy. Hospital claim data from patients admitted with a NSTEMI between 2017 and 2019 were used for this study. Included patients were stratified by center of admission (intervention vs. general center) and subdivided by revascularisation strategy (PCI, CABG, or no revascularisation [noRevasc]). The primary outcome was length of hospital stay. Secondary outcomes included: duration between admission and diagnostic angiography and revascularisation, number of intracoronary procedures, clinical outcomes at 30 days (MACE: all-cause mortality, recurrent myocardial infarction and cardiac readmission) and total costs (accumulation of costs for hospital claims and interhospital ambulance rides). RESULTS: A total of 9641 NSTEMI events (9167 unique patients) were analyzed of which 5399 patients (56%) were admitted at an intervention center and 4242 patients to a general center. Duration of hospitalization was significantly shorter at direct presentation at an intervention centre for all study groups (5 days [2-11] vs. 7 days [4-12], p < 0.001). For PCI, direct presentation at an intervention center yielded shorter time to diagnostic angiography (1 day [0-2] vs. 1 day [1-2], p < 0.01) and revascularisation (1 day [0-3] vs. 4 days [1-7], p < 0.001) and less intracoronary procedures per patient (2 [1-2] vs. 2 [2-2], p < 0.001). For CABG, time to revascularisation was shorter (8 days [5-12] vs. 10 days [7-14], p < 0.001). Total costs were significantly lower in case of direct presentation in an intervention center for all treatment groups 10.211 (8750-18.192) versus 13.741 (11.588-19.381), p < 0.001) while MACE was similar 11.8% versus 12.4%, p = 0.344). CONCLUSION: NSTEMI patients who were directly presented to an intervention center account for shorter duration of hospitalization, less time to revascularisation, less interhospital transfers, less intracoronary procedures and lower costs compared to patients who present at a general center.
Assuntos
Infarto do Miocárdio sem Supradesnível do Segmento ST , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea , Infarto do Miocárdio com Supradesnível do Segmento ST , Humanos , Infarto do Miocárdio sem Supradesnível do Segmento ST/diagnóstico , Infarto do Miocárdio sem Supradesnível do Segmento ST/cirurgia , Hospitalização , Infarto do Miocárdio com Supradesnível do Segmento ST/terapia , Tempo de Internação , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Chest pain is among the most common reasons for Emergency Department (ED) presentation, while most patients should be considered low risk for Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS). Management of these patients places a significant burden on our health care system. Various risk scores have been developed to facilitate the triage of patients with chest pain. However, it remains unclear which score performs best in identifying low risk patients, in various settings. The aim of this study was to determine which risk score performs best in ruling out non-ST elevation ACS (NSTE-ACS). METHODS: Data was collected from all patients >18 years presenting to the ED between 01 and 01-2019 and 01-07-2019, if they were suspected of NSTE-ACS. Primary endpoint was NSTE-ACS during presentation to the ED or hospitalization, according to the 2020 ESC guidelines. In a secondary analysis we determined the number low-risk patients, at set safety levels of 95% and 98%. RESULTS: A total of 536 patients were included, 192 (35.9%) were admitted to the hospital and NSTE-ACS occurred in 134 of 536 patients (25.0%). When areas under the curve (AUC) were compared, pre-HEART (0.869; CI 0.835-0.903), T-MACS (0.862; CI 0.825-0.898) and HEART (0.850; CI 0.815-0.885) performed best. At a safety level of 98%, the HEART score was the best performing risk score and identified 28.9% of patients as low risk, and missed 0 cases of NSTE-ACS. Followed by the pre-HEART score, which identified 18.3% of all patients as low risk, and missed 0% of NSTE-ACS. CONCLUSIONS: The newly developed pre-HEART score is both practical and has accurate diagnostic properties, closely followed by the HEART score, and T-MACS. New pre-hospital risk scores are promising and much needed. Future studies should focus on the usage of pre-hospital scores for triage of patients with chest pain, in order to reduce the burden on emergency health care.
Assuntos
Síndrome Coronariana Aguda , Síndrome Coronariana Aguda/complicações , Síndrome Coronariana Aguda/diagnóstico , Dor no Peito/diagnóstico , Dor no Peito/etiologia , Humanos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Medição de Risco , TriagemRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Patients with suspected non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) are currently transported and admitted to the nearest emergency department (ED) for risk stratification, diagnostic workup and treatment. Although such patients with NSTE-ACS can benefit from direct transfer to a PCI center for early invasive treatment, no reliable prehospital triage tools are available. Recently, the PreHEART score has been validated in the PreHEART study for prehospital triage of patients with suspected NSTE-ACS. METHODS: The primary objective of the TRIAGE-ACS study, a prospective cohort study, is to determine whether prehospital triage using the PreHEART score can significantly reduce time from first medical contact to final diagnostics and revascularization in patients in need of coronary revascularization. The first cohort (control cohort; n = 500) is observatory and is used as a reference group for the second cohort. In the second cohort (interventional cohort; n = 500) patients are stratified in the ambulance for direct transfer to either a PCI or a non-PCI center, based on the PreHEART score. These two cohorts will be compared with each other. In total, 1000 patients will be included. Follow-up for endpoints will be performed by reviewing the medical record after 30 days, 1 year, and 2 years. CONCLUSION: The TRIAGE-ACS study is the first prospective study to investigate the impact of prehospital triage using the PreHEART score on time to final invasive diagnostics and treatment in patients with NSTE-ACS in need of revascularization by transferring high risk patients directly to a PCI center and patients at a low risk of having an NSTE-ACS to a non-PCI center. Such triage strategy could potentially result in optimization of regional care for all ACS patients.
Assuntos
Síndrome Coronariana Aguda , Eletrocardiografia , Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência , Humanos , Estudos Prospectivos , Fatores de Tempo , TriagemRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To review, inventory and compare available diagnostic tools and investigate which tool has the best performance for prehospital risk assessment in patients suspected of non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS). METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Medline and Embase were searched up till 1 April 2021. Prospective studies with patients, suspected of NSTE-ACS, presenting in the primary care setting or by emergency medical services (EMS) were included. The most important exclusion criteria were studies including only patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction and studies before 1995, the pretroponin era. The primary end point was the final hospital discharge diagnosis of NSTE-ACS or major adverse cardiac events (MACE) within 6 weeks. Risk of bias was evaluated by the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies Criteria. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES: Sensitivity, specificity and likelihood ratio of findings for risk stratification in patients suspected of NSTE-ACS. RESULTS: In total, 15 prospective studies were included; these studies reflected in total 26 083 patients. No specific variables related to symptoms, physical examination or risk factors were useful in risk stratification for NSTE-ACS diagnosis. The most useful electrocardiographic finding was ST-segment depression (LR+3.85 (95% CI 2.58 to 5.76)). Point-of-care troponin was found to be a strong predictor for NSTE-ACS in primary care (LR+14.16 (95% CI 4.28 to 46.90) and EMS setting (LR+6.16 (95% CI 5.02 to 7.57)). Combined risk scores were the best for risk assessment in an NSTE-ACS. From the combined risk scores that can be used immediately in a prehospital setting, the PreHEART score, a validated combined risk score for prehospital use, derived from the HEART score (History, ECG, Age, Risk factors, Troponin), was most useful for risk stratification in patients with NSTE-ACS (LR+8.19 (95% CI 5.47 to 12.26)) and for identifying patients without ACS (LR-0.05 (95% CI 0.02 to 0.15)). DISCUSSION: Important study limitations were verification bias and heterogeneity between studies. In the prehospital setting, several diagnostic tools have been reported which could improve risk stratification, triage and early treatment in patients suspected for NSTE-ACS. On-site assessment of troponin and combined risk scores derived from the HEART score are strong predictors. These results support further studies to investigate the impact of these new tools on logistics and clinical outcome. FUNDING: This study is funded by ZonMw, the Dutch Organisation for Health Research and Development. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: This meta-analysis was published for registration in PROSPERO prior to starting (CRD York, CRD42021254122).
Assuntos
Síndrome Coronariana Aguda , Serviços Médicos de Emergência , Síndrome Coronariana Aguda/diagnóstico , Síndrome Coronariana Aguda/terapia , Eletrocardiografia/métodos , Serviços Médicos de Emergência/métodos , Humanos , Estudos Prospectivos , Medição de Risco/métodosRESUMO
The timely revascularization of an occluded coronary artery is the cornerstone of treatment in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). As essential as this treatment is, it can also cause additional damage to cardiomyocytes that were still viable before reperfusion, increasing infarct size. This has been termed "myocardial reperfusion injury". To date, there is still no effective treatment for myocardial reperfusion injury in patients with STEMI. While numerous attempts have been made to overcome this hurdle with various experimental therapies, the common denominator of these therapies is that, although they often work in the preclinical setting, they fail to demonstrate the same results in human trials. Hypothermia is an example of such a therapy. Although promising results were derived from experimental studies, multiple randomized controlled trials failed to do the same. This review includes a discussion of hypothermia as a potential treatment for myocardial reperfusion injury, including lessons learned from previous (negative) trials, advanced techniques and materials in current hypothermic treatment, and the possible future of hypothermia for cardioprotection in patients with STEMI.
RESUMO
Background This study aimed to investigate longitudinal physiological changes in the recanalized coronary chronic total occlusion (CTO) vessel and its dependent myocardium after successful percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Methods and Results In this pilot study, 25 patients scheduled for elective CTO PCI with viable myocardium and angiographically visible collaterals were included. Absolute coronary blood flow and absolute microvascular resistance were measured invasively using continuous thermodilution. Measurements were performed immediately after successful CTO PCI and at short-term follow-up. In a subgroup of patients, physiological measurements were performed at the predominant donor vessel before CTO PCI, immediately afterwards, and at follow-up. Absolute coronary blood flow in the recanalized CTO artery increased from 148±53 mL/min immediately after PCI to 221±77 mL/min at follow-up (P<0.001). In agreement, absolute resistance in the myocardial territory perfused by the CTO artery, decreased from 545±255 Wood units immediately after the procedure to 387±128 Wood units at follow-up (P=0.014). There were no significant changes in the absolute coronary blood flow and resistance in the predominant donor between baseline and follow-up. Positive remodeling of the distal CTO vessel with an increase in lumen diameter was observed. Conclusions After successful CTO PCI, blood flow in the recanalized artery and microvascular function of the dependent myocardium are not immediately normal but recover over time.