Relationship between community hospital versus pre-hospital location of randomisation and clinical outcomes in ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients: insights from the Stream study.
European Heart Journal: Acute Cardiovascular Care · 2017-06-19 · Randomised trial
Abstract
AIMS: The STREAM study randomly assigned ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients to receive a pharmacoinvasive versus primary percutaneous coronary intervention reperfusion strategy. We assessed whether there was an association between outcomes based on randomisation at a community hospital versus a prehospital location. METHODS/RESULTS: Community hospital patients (358/1866 (19.2%)) were compared to prehospital patients and their outcomes categorised into pharmacoinvasive according to their treatment assignment. Compared to prehospital patients, community hospital patients had more diabetes (17.8% vs. 11.5%, P=0.001), higher Killip Class >1 (9.4% vs. 5.0%, P=0.002) and thrombolysis in myocardial infarction risk scores ⩾5 (18.2% vs. 12.4%, P=0.005). The 30-day primary endpoint (death, shock, congestive heart failure and re-infarction) for community hospital patients was 14.9% versus 13.2% for prehospital patients ( P=0.403). Community hospital pharmacoinvasive patients tended to receive less rescue (35.1% vs. 42.8%, P=0.062); when deployed their rescue was delayed 43 minutes. Community hospital patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention experienced a delay of 31 minutes versus prehospital patients. Pharmacoinvasive patients receiving scheduled angiography from a community hospital and prehospital patients had comparable times to angiography (17.7 vs. 18.7 hours) and low event rates (6.2% vs. 8.0%). Although the interaction between randomisation location and treatment received on the primary endpoint was not significant ( Pinteraction=0.065) those pharmacoinvasive patients requiring rescue from community hospitals had worse outcomes than prehospital rescue patients (odds ratio 2.28, 95% confidence interval 1.16-4.49). CONCLUSION: Within STREAM, STEMI patients randomly assigned at community hospitals had a higher baseline risk but similar outcomes compared to those studied prehospital patients irrespective of successful pharmacoinvasive therapy or primary percutaneous coronary intervention. However, worse outcomes in the pharmacoinvasive patients requiring rescue in community hospitals emphasises their need for immediate transfer to a percutaneous coronary intervention-capable hospital.
Abstract © the authors or publisher, via PubMed. Reuse and removal
Tags
Antithrombotics & thrombolytics · Mortality & survival · Thrombolytics · Time intervals
Related articles
- Meta-Analysis Comparing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Pharmacoinvasive Therapy in Transfer Patients with ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction. (Am J Cardiol, 2018)
- Temporal improvements in prehospital systems-of-care for ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients in Victoria, Australia: a retrospective study. (BMC Emerg Med, 2026)
- Rescue percutaneous coronary intervention in the pharmaco-invasive era of ST-elevation myocardial infarction: insights from the STREAM-2 trial. (Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care, 2026)
- Timeliness of reperfusion in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and outcomes in Kerala, India: results of the TRUST outcomes registry. (Postgrad Med J, 2025)
- Paramedic-Delivered Fibrinolysis in the Treatment of ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Comparison of a Physician-Authorized versus Autonomous Paramedic Approach. (Prehosp Emerg Care, 2020)
- Trends in clinical outcomes and survival following prehospital thrombolytic therapy given by ambulance clinicians for ST-elevation myocardial infarction in rural sub-arctic Norway. (Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care, 2019)