[Preclinical loading in patients with acute chest pain and acute coronary syndrome - PRELOAD survey].

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Sascha Macherey-Meyer, Simon Braumann, Sebastian Heyne, Max Maria Meertens, Tobias Tichelbäcker, Stephan Baldus, Samuel Lee, Christoph Adler
{"title":"[Preclinical loading in patients with acute chest pain and acute coronary syndrome - PRELOAD survey].","authors":"Sascha Macherey-Meyer, Simon Braumann, Sebastian Heyne, Max Maria Meertens, Tobias Tichelbäcker, Stephan Baldus, Samuel Lee, Christoph Adler","doi":"10.1007/s00063-023-01087-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Guidelines on myocardial infarction (MI) recommend antithrombotic and anticoagulatory treatment at time of diagnosis. MI with ST segment elevation (STEMI) is mostly a certain diagnosis. Acute coronary syndrome without ST segment elevation (NSTE-ACS) has diagnostic uncertainty and remains a working diagnosis in the prehospital setting.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>Assessment of prehospital loading with aspirin and heparin depending on ACS subtype and pretreatment with oral anticoagulants.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The PRELOAD survey was a nationwide German study. STEMI/NSTE-ACS scenarios were designed and varied in pretreatment: I) no pretreatment, II) new oral anticoagulants (NOAC), III) vitamin K antagonist (VKA). Loading strategy was assessed and included: a) aspirin (ASA), b) unfractionated heparin (UFH), c) ASA + UFH, d) no loading.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 708 emergency physicians were included. In NSTE-ACS without pretreatment, 79% chose loading (p < 0.001). ASA + UFH (71.4%) was the preferred option. In corresponding STEMI scenario, 100% chose loading and 98.6% preferred ASA + UFH (p < 0.001). In NSTE-ACS with NOAC pretreatment, 69.8% favored loading (p < 0.001); in VKA pretreatment the corresponding rate was 72.3% (p < 0.001). In each scenario, ASA was the preferred option. In STEMI with NOAC pretreatment, 97.5% chose loading (p < 0.001); analogous rate was 96.8% in STEMI with VKA pretreatment (p < 0.001). ASA was the preferred option again.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Prehospital loading was the preferred treatment strategy despite the diagnostic uncertainty in NSTE-ACS and guidelines recommending loading at time of diagnosis. Pretreatment with oral anticoagulants resulted in a strategy shift to loading with only aspirin. In STEMI patients, this indicates potential undertreatment.</p>","PeriodicalId":49019,"journal":{"name":"Medizinische Klinik-Intensivmedizin Und Notfallmedizin","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11461559/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medizinische Klinik-Intensivmedizin Und Notfallmedizin","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00063-023-01087-8","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Guidelines on myocardial infarction (MI) recommend antithrombotic and anticoagulatory treatment at time of diagnosis. MI with ST segment elevation (STEMI) is mostly a certain diagnosis. Acute coronary syndrome without ST segment elevation (NSTE-ACS) has diagnostic uncertainty and remains a working diagnosis in the prehospital setting.

Objective: Assessment of prehospital loading with aspirin and heparin depending on ACS subtype and pretreatment with oral anticoagulants.

Methods: The PRELOAD survey was a nationwide German study. STEMI/NSTE-ACS scenarios were designed and varied in pretreatment: I) no pretreatment, II) new oral anticoagulants (NOAC), III) vitamin K antagonist (VKA). Loading strategy was assessed and included: a) aspirin (ASA), b) unfractionated heparin (UFH), c) ASA + UFH, d) no loading.

Results: A total of 708 emergency physicians were included. In NSTE-ACS without pretreatment, 79% chose loading (p < 0.001). ASA + UFH (71.4%) was the preferred option. In corresponding STEMI scenario, 100% chose loading and 98.6% preferred ASA + UFH (p < 0.001). In NSTE-ACS with NOAC pretreatment, 69.8% favored loading (p < 0.001); in VKA pretreatment the corresponding rate was 72.3% (p < 0.001). In each scenario, ASA was the preferred option. In STEMI with NOAC pretreatment, 97.5% chose loading (p < 0.001); analogous rate was 96.8% in STEMI with VKA pretreatment (p < 0.001). ASA was the preferred option again.

Conclusions: Prehospital loading was the preferred treatment strategy despite the diagnostic uncertainty in NSTE-ACS and guidelines recommending loading at time of diagnosis. Pretreatment with oral anticoagulants resulted in a strategy shift to loading with only aspirin. In STEMI patients, this indicates potential undertreatment.

[急性胸痛和急性冠脉综合征患者的临床前负荷- PRELOAD调查]。
背景:心肌梗死(MI)指南推荐在诊断时进行抗血栓和抗凝治疗。心肌梗死合并ST段抬高(STEMI)多为确定诊断。急性冠脉综合征无ST段抬高(NSTE-ACS)具有诊断不确定性,在院前诊断仍然有效。目的:评价不同ACS亚型患者院前阿司匹林和肝素负荷及口服抗凝药物预处理情况。方法:PRELOAD调查是一项全国性的德国研究。设计STEMI/NSTE-ACS方案并进行不同的预处理:I)无预处理,II)新型口服抗凝剂(NOAC), III)维生素K拮抗剂(VKA)。评估加载策略,包括:a)阿司匹林(ASA), b)未分级肝素(UFH), c) ASA + UFH, d)不加载。结果:共纳入708名急诊医师。在未进行预处理的NSTE-ACS中,79%的患者选择加载(p )。结论:院前加载是首选的治疗策略,尽管NSTE-ACS的诊断不确定,并且指南建议在诊断时加载。口服抗凝剂的预处理导致策略转变为仅使用阿司匹林。在STEMI患者中,这表明潜在的治疗不足。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
9.10%
发文量
93
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Medizinische Klinik – Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin is an internationally respected interdisciplinary journal. It is intended for physicians, nurses, respiratory and physical therapists active in intensive care and accident/emergency units, but also for internists, anesthesiologists, surgeons, neurologists, and pediatricians with special interest in intensive care medicine. Comprehensive reviews describe the most recent advances in the field of internal medicine with special focus on intensive care problems. Freely submitted original articles present important studies in this discipline and promote scientific exchange, while articles in the category Photo essay feature interesting cases and aim at optimizing diagnostic and therapeutic strategies. In the rubric journal club well-respected experts comment on outstanding international publications. Review articles under the rubric "Continuing Medical Education" present verified results of scientific research and their integration into daily practice. The rubrics "Nursing practice" and "Physical therapy" round out the information.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信