Background

Current guidelines suggest a "door-in-door-out" (DIDO) time of 30 minutes or shorter for patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) who arrive at a STEMI referral hospital and are transferred to a STEMI-receiving center for primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Experts previously identified 18 system practices as critical for reducing DIDO times. The objective of this study was to describe how frequently these critical practices are used and to determine whether their use was associated with shorter DIDO times.

Methods

We surveyed 18 STEMI referral hospitals for 4 STEMI-receiving centers regarding their use of these 18 practices. The median number used was 14 practices (interquartile range 12-15). We then evaluated their association with DIDO times in all patients (n = 93) transferred from these STEMI referral hospitals to the 4 STEMI-receiving centers for primary percutaneous coronary intervention.

Results

In univariate linear regression analyses, system-wide quality improvement programs with leaders in the emergency medical services agencies and STEMI referral hospitals were associated with shorter DIDO times (P < 0.001 for all). Overall use of system practices was not associated with DIDO times (P = 0.143). The majority (76%, 95% confidence interval: 66%-85%) of DIDO times did not meet the 30-minute goal.

Conclusions

These findings highlight the difficulty in achieving the 30-minute DIDO goal and the need for continued focus on strategies for reducing DIDO time, including system-wide quality improvement programs.

Background

Current guidelines recommend ≤90 minutes from first medical contact to percutaneous coronary intervention (FMC2B) for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients. We evaluated the relationship between patient home distance from a percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) center, prehospital electrocardiogram (ECG) use, and FMC2B time among patients with STEMI.

Methods

We performed a retrospective cohort study including all STEMI patients in the ACTION-Get With The Guidelines registry from July 1, 2008, to September 30, 2012, who were transported by ambulance to a PCI center. Patient home distance was defined as the driving distance from the patient's home zip code to the PCI center address. Distance was classified into tertiles, and linear regression was used to characterize the interaction between prehospital ECG use and patient home distance with respect to FMC2B time.

Results

Of the 29,506 STEMI patients, 19,690 (67%) received a prehospital ECG. The median patient home distance to the PCI center was 11.0 miles among patients with and 9.9 miles among those without a prehospital ECG. Prehospital ECGs were associated with a 10-minute reduction in the FMC2B time (P < .0001), which was consistent across distance tertiles (11 vs 11 vs 10 minutes). The association between prehospital ECGs and shorter FMC2B was attenuated by 0.8 minute for every 10-mile increase in distance (interaction P = .0002).

Conclusions

Prehospital ECGs are associated with a 10-minute reduction in the FMC2B time. However, patient home distance from a PCI center does not substantially change this association.

This first Guideline for Reasonable and Appropriate Care in the Emergency Department (GRACE-1) from the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine is on the topic: Recurrent, Low-risk Chest Pain in the Emergency Department. The multidisciplinary guideline panel used The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to assess the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendations regarding eight priority questions for adult patients with recurrent, low-risk chest pain and have derived the following evidence based recommendations: (1) for those >3 h chest pain duration we suggest a single, high-sensitivity troponin below a validated threshold to reasonably exclude acute coronary syndrome (ACS) within 30 days; (2) for those with a normal stress test within the previous 12 months, we do not recommend repeat routine stress testing as a means to decrease rates of major adverse cardiac events at 30 days; (3) insufficient evidence to recommend hospitalization (either standard inpatient admission or observation stay) versus discharge as a strategy to mitigate major adverse cardiac events within 30 days; (4) for those with non-obstructive (<50% stenosis) coronary artery disease (CAD) on prior angiography within 5 years, we suggest referral for expedited outpatient testing as warranted rather than admission for inpatient evaluation; (5) for those with no occlusive CAD (0% stenosis) on prior angiography within 5 years, we recommend referral for expedited outpatient testing as warranted rather than admission for inpatient evaluation; (6) for those with a prior coronary computed tomographic angiography within the past 2 years with no coronary stenosis, we suggest no further diagnostic testing other than a single, normal high-sensitivity troponin below a validated threshold to exclude ACS within that 2 year time frame; (7) we suggest the use of depression and anxiety screening tools as these might have an effect on healthcare use and return emergency department (ED) visits; and (8) we suggest referral for anxiety or depression management, as this might have an impact on healthcare use and return ED visits.

Aims

Kidney function changes dynamically during AHF treatment, but risk factors for and consequences of worsening renal function (WRF) at hospital admission are uncertain. We aimed to determine the significance of WRF at admission for acute heart failure (AHF).

Methods and results

We evaluated a subgroup of 406 patients from The Acute Kidney Injury Neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin Evaluation of Symptomatic heart failure Study (AKINESIS) who had serum creatinine measurements available within 3 months before and at the time of admission. Admission WRF was primarily defined as a 0.3 mg/dL or 50% creatinine increase from preadmission. Alternative definitions evaluated were a ≥0.5 mg/dL creatinine increase, ≥25% glomerular filtration rate decrease, and an overall change in creatinine. Predictors of admission WRF were evaluated. Outcomes evaluated were length of hospitalization, a composite of adverse in-hospital events, and the composite of death or HF readmission at 30, 90, and 365 days. Biomarkers' prognostic ability for these outcomes were evaluated in patients with admission WRF. One-hundred six patients (26%) had admission WRF. These patients had features of more severe AHF with lower blood pressure, higher BUN, and lower serum sodium concentrations at admission. Higher BNP (odds ratio [OR] per doubling 1.16-1.28, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.00-1.55) and lower diastolic blood pressure (OR 0.97-0.98, 95% CI 0.96-0.99) were associated with a higher odds for the three definitions of admission WRF. The primary WRF definition was not associated with a longer hospitalization, but alternative WRF definitions were (1.3 to 1.6 days longer, 95% CI 1.0-2.2). WRF across definitions was not associated with a higher odds of adverse in-hospital events or a higher risk of death or HF readmission. In the subset of patients with WRF, biomarkers were not prognostic for any outcome.

Conclusions

Admission WRF is common in AHF patients and is associated with an increased length of hospitalization, but not adverse in-hospital events, death, or HF readmission. Among those with admission WRF, biomarkers did not risk stratify for adverse events.