Abstract 16233: Trends in Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PPCI) in Patients Presenting to Non-PCI Capable Hospitals With STEMI in New York State
IntroductionIn patients presenting to non-PCI capable hospital with STEMI, the management options include transfer for primary PCI (PPCI) or administration of thrombolytics and transfer for PCI (lytics + PCI), a decision largely driven by the estimated door to device time. The 2013 AHA/ACC STEMI gui...
Saved in:
Published in | Circulation (New York, N.Y.) Vol. 138; no. Suppl_1 Suppl 1; p. A16233 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
by the American College of Cardiology Foundation and the American Heart Association, Inc
06.11.2018
|
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Summary: | IntroductionIn patients presenting to non-PCI capable hospital with STEMI, the management options include transfer for primary PCI (PPCI) or administration of thrombolytics and transfer for PCI (lytics + PCI), a decision largely driven by the estimated door to device time. The 2013 AHA/ACC STEMI guidelines increased the door to device time for STEMI transfer patients from < 90 minutes to < 120 minutes. Whether this change has impacted management is not known.MethodsPatients in the New York (NY) State PCI Registry who underwent PCI (PPCI or lytics + PCI) for STEMI after being transferred from a non-PCI capable hospital in 2012 and 2014 were included in this study. Primary outcome was a change in the proportion of patients who underwent PPCI in relation to lytics + PCI in 2014 as compared with year 2012. Secondary outcomes were changes in transfer time (non-PCI capable transfer hospital door to PCI hospital door time), PCI hospital door to device time, transfer hospital door to device time in PPCI patients, and in-hospital mortality for all STEMI transfer patients who underwent PCI.ResultsThere were 2019 and 1799 patients who underwent PCI (PCI or lytics +PCI) for a STEMI after presenting to a non-PCI capable hospital in NY State in 2012 and 2014 respectively. There was an increase in the proportion of patients receiving PPCI (vs lytics+ PCI) from 2012 to 2014 (74.15% to 78.32%, p = 0.0025). Moreover, in patients receiving PPCI, there was also a decrease in transfer time [median102 min (Q1:73, Q3162) to 97 min (Q170, Q3:147),p = 0.005], PCI hospital door to device time [35 min (25,53) to 34 min (24, 51), p = 0.07), and transfer hospital door to device time [143 min (105, 220) to 134 min (102, 200), p = 0.005]. However, there was no change in mortality from 2012 to 2014 in all STEMI transfer patients who underwent PCI (2.13% vs 2.95%, p = 0.11).ConclusionsData from NY State indicates a significant increase in referral for PPCI in patients presenting with a STEMI to a non-PCI capable hospital with the change in guidelines increasing the door to device times for transfer patients. Whether such a strategy improves outcomes should be tested in further studies. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0009-7322 1524-4539 |