RESUMO
RESUMEN Introducción: La demora a la reperfusión del síndrome coronario agudo con elevación del segmento ST es un factor determinante en el pronóstico. Su reducción podría disminuir la morbimortalidad. Objetivo: Identificar y modificar las barreras detectadas en 20 años de tratamiento del síndrome coronario agudo con elevación del segmento ST en un centro de tercer nivel de una ciudad de alta densidad demográfica para evaluar su efecto en el resultado del procedimiento. Material y métodos: Incluimos prospectiva y consecutivamente del 01/01/2000 al 31/12/2019, 3007 pacientes con síndrome coronario agudo con elevación del segmento ST dentro de las 12 h de iniciados los síntomas para realizar angioplastia primaria. Se dividió el tiempo desde el comienzo de los síntomas hasta la insuflación del balón en intervalos. Luego de identificar las barreras (2000-2009) se incorporaron cambios al procedimiento. Se organizó a la población en 2 grupos (G) G1: preimplementación de cambios (2000-2009) y G2: posimplementación (2010- 2019). Resultados: Se incluyeron en G1 1409 pacientes y en G2 1598. Sin diferencias demográficas, excepto por el tipo de angioplastia. Se identificaron demoras al realizar el diagnóstico, de comunicación entre médicos, del traslado y del ingreso del paciente a hemodinamia. Con los cambios, disminuimos el intervalo consulta-contacto con el hemodinamista [G1: 90 min (36-168) vs. G2: 77 min (36-144) p -0,01] y el intervalo contacto hemodinamista-ingreso a Hemodinamia [G1: 75 min (55-100) vs. G2: 51 min (34-70) p -0,01]. Se redujo la mortalidad intrahospitalaria (G1: 9,2% vs. G2:6,7% p -0,01) y al 6to mes (G1: 13,1% vs. G2: 7,5% p -0,01). Conclusiones: El retraso al diagnóstico, la dificultad en la comunicación y la forma de traslado fueron las principales causas de demora. La implementación de un protocolo de procedimientos permitió reducir las demoras. La evaluación continua de resultados y la educación permanente, constituyen los pilares fundamentales para la optimización de programas de atención en red.
ABSTRACT Background: The delay to reperfusion of ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (STEACS) is a key factor in its prognosis, and its reduction could reduce morbidity and mortality. Objective: The aim of this study was to identify and modify the barriers detected in 20 years of STEACS treatment in a tertiary care center of a densely populated city to evaluate their effect on the outcome of the procedure. Methods: A total of 3007 patients with STEACS within 12 hours of symptoms onset were prospectively and consecutively included to undergo primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) from January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2019. Time from symptoms onset to balloon inflation was divided into intervals. After barriers were identified (2000-2009), the procedure was changed. The population was divided into two groups (G) G1: pre-implementation (2000-2009) and G2: post-implementation (2010-2019) of changes. Results: G1 included 1409 and G2 1598 patients with no demographic differences except for the type of PCI. Delays were identified in diagnosis, communication between physicians, transfer and admission of the patient to the hemodynamics lab. Procedural changes decreased first medical contact-hemodynamic team contact interval [G1: 90 min (36-168) vs. G2: 77 min (36-144) p -0.01] and hemodynamic team contact-hemodynamics lab admission interval [G1: 75 min (55-100) vs. G2: 51 min (34-70) p -0.01] and reduced in-hospital (G1: 9,2% vs. G2: 6,7% p -0,01) and 6-month (G1: 13.1% vs. G2: 7.5% p -0. 01) mortality. Conclusions: Delay in diagnosis, difficulty in communication and type of transfer were the most important causes of delay. Implementing a procedural protocol reduced delays. Continuous evaluation of results and permanent education constitute the fundamental cornerstones for optimizing network care programs.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown a reduction in radiation dose and contrast volume using dual-axis rotational coronary angiography (DARCA), but this has not been replicated in a population with 100% coronary artery disease (CAD). OBJECTIVE: To find if DARCA dose reduction is achievable in this population, we sought to compare the radiation dose, contrast volume, and procedure time between DARCA and conventional coronary angiography (CCA) techniques in a setting characterized by a prevalence of 100% suspected coronary artery disease. METHODS: An all-comer, prospective, randomized, open-label trial was conducted. Cine acquisition dose-area product (DAP), cumulative air kerma (AK), effective dose (E), fluoroscopic time, contrast volume, AK, cine acquisition DAP (CADAP), fluoroscopic DAP (F-DAP), and total DAP were compared between DARCA and CCA groups. RESULTS: We included 503 consecutive patients with suspected CAD. 252 were assigned to DARCA and 251 to CCA. Stable coronary artery disease was reported in 465 cases and non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome in 38. Mean age: 61.88 ± 11.2 years, male gender 70.2%. DARCA arm patients showed lower total E dose (6.85 [4.55-10.83] vs. 7.91 [5.58-11.94] Sv; P = .0023), and cine E (3.00 [2.00-4.00] vs. 4.00 [3.00-5.00] Sv; P < .0001). Total DAP was also lower (40.3 [26.8-63.7] vs. 46.5 [32.8-70.2] Gycm2; P = .0023), as a consequence of a lower CADAP (16.3 [10.5-22.9] vs. 23.4 [17.4-32.0] Gycm2; P < .0001), with lower AK (367 [248-1497] vs. 497 [381-1827] mGy; P < .0001), with less contrast medium used (90 [60.0-106.0] vs. 100 [75.0-120.0] mL; P = .014). CONCLUSION: In a population with 100% suspected coronary artery disease, DARCA provides accurate information required in CAD, is safe, and results in a significant decrease in contrast material volume and radiation dose compared with CCA. The required extra projections did not neutralize the DARCA radiation dose and contrast volume reduction achievements.
