[Evaluation of therapeutic strategies for myocardial infarction: the ESTIM Midi-Pyrénées survey].
Archives des maladies du coeur et des vaisseaux · 2005-11-01 · Observational study
Abstract
UNLABELLED: The aim of the ESTIM Midi-Pyrénées survey was to monitor the management of acute coronary syndrome with ST segment elevation by cardiologists and emergency departments in the Midi-Pyrénées region. Over a period of 2 years between June 2001 and June 2003, 1287 patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome within the first 24 hours were recruited prospectively. The initial management of these patients was undertaken either by a mobile medical team in the pre-hospital phase, or in a hospital emergency department, non-interventional cardiology department or an interventional cardiology department in 51.8%, 28.8%, 9.6% et 9.9% of cases respectively. Depending on these four modes of initial management, the median time for initial management was 1h30, 2h45, 4h30 et 4h respectively. Emergency coronary reperfusion was proposed in 89.6% of cases. Of the patients in whom reperfusion was attempted within the first 12 hours, 33.7% underwent pre-hospital thrombolysis (median delay of 1h48), 35.8% underwent thrombolysis in hospital (median delay 3h), and 30.4% underwent primary angioplasty (median delay 4h40). Thrombolysis was followed by angioplasty in 80% of cases. A combined approach with thrombolysis and angioplasty was applied in 41% of patients. At one month the rate of major cardiac events, death, and/or subsequent myocardial infarction was 12%. Multivariate analysis revealed that the only significant adverse prognostic features were: not offering reperfusion [Odds ratio (OR) 4, confidence interval (CI) 2.3-3.7] and age [OR 3.8, CI 2.3-6.2]. The method of reperfusion did not influence the subsequent outcome in this regional survey. CONCLUSION: pre-hospital management allows early revascularisation. In our region there was no significant prognostic difference between pre-hospital thrombolysis and primary angioplasty. It shows that the logistic and therapeutic potentials of prehospital care are not being sufficiently exploited.