On- vs off-hours primary percutaneous coronary intervention: a single-center 5-year experience

Fernando Mané, R. Flores, Rodrigo Silva, I. Conde, Ana Sofia Ferreira, J. Costa, C. Quina-Rodrigues, Carlos Galvão-Braga, and, Jorge Marques
{"title":"On- vs off-hours primary percutaneous coronary intervention: a single-center 5-year experience","authors":"Fernando Mané, R. Flores, Rodrigo Silva, I. Conde, Ana Sofia Ferreira, J. Costa, C. Quina-Rodrigues, Carlos Galvão-Braga, and, Jorge Marques","doi":"10.24875/recice.m23000427","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction and objectives: In patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) treatment delay significantly affects outcomes. The effect of admission time in STEMI patients is unknown when percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is the preferred reperfusion strategy. This study aimed to determine the association between STEMI outcomes and the timing of admission in a PCI center in south-western Europe. Methods: This retrospective cohort study analyzed the local electronic data from 1222 consecutive STEMI patients treated with PCI. On-hours were defined as admission from Monday to Friday between 8:00 AM and 6:00 PM on non-national holidays. Results: A total of 439 patients (36%) were admitted on-hours and 783 patients (64%) were admitted off-hours. Baseline characteristics were well-balanced between the 2 groups, including the percentage of patients admitted in cardiogenic shock (on-hours 5% vs off-hours 4%; P = .62). The median time from first medical contact to reperfusion did not differ between the 2 groups (on-hours 120 minutes vs off-hours 123 minutes, P = .54) and no association was observed between admission time and in-hospital mortality (on-hours 5% vs off-hours 5%, P = .90) or 1-year mortality (on-hours 10% vs off-hours 10%, P = .97). Survival analysis showed no differences in on-hours PCI vs off-hours PCI (HR, 1.1; 95%CI, 0.74-1.64; P = .64). Conclusions: In a contemporary emergency network, the timing of STEMI patients’ admission to the PCI center was not associated with reperfusion delays or increased mortality.","PeriodicalId":509332,"journal":{"name":"REC: interventional cardiology (English Edition)","volume":"48 21","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"REC: interventional cardiology (English Edition)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24875/recice.m23000427","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction and objectives: In patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) treatment delay significantly affects outcomes. The effect of admission time in STEMI patients is unknown when percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is the preferred reperfusion strategy. This study aimed to determine the association between STEMI outcomes and the timing of admission in a PCI center in south-western Europe. Methods: This retrospective cohort study analyzed the local electronic data from 1222 consecutive STEMI patients treated with PCI. On-hours were defined as admission from Monday to Friday between 8:00 AM and 6:00 PM on non-national holidays. Results: A total of 439 patients (36%) were admitted on-hours and 783 patients (64%) were admitted off-hours. Baseline characteristics were well-balanced between the 2 groups, including the percentage of patients admitted in cardiogenic shock (on-hours 5% vs off-hours 4%; P = .62). The median time from first medical contact to reperfusion did not differ between the 2 groups (on-hours 120 minutes vs off-hours 123 minutes, P = .54) and no association was observed between admission time and in-hospital mortality (on-hours 5% vs off-hours 5%, P = .90) or 1-year mortality (on-hours 10% vs off-hours 10%, P = .97). Survival analysis showed no differences in on-hours PCI vs off-hours PCI (HR, 1.1; 95%CI, 0.74-1.64; P = .64). Conclusions: In a contemporary emergency network, the timing of STEMI patients’ admission to the PCI center was not associated with reperfusion delays or increased mortality.
上班时间与下班时间经皮冠状动脉介入治疗:单中心 5 年经验
导言和目标:对于 ST 段抬高型心肌梗死(STEMI)患者,治疗延迟会严重影响预后。当经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)成为首选再灌注策略时,STEMI 患者入院时间的影响尚不清楚。本研究旨在确定欧洲西南部一家 PCI 中心的 STEMI 预后与入院时间之间的关系。方法:这项回顾性队列研究分析了当地 1222 名连续接受 PCI 治疗的 STEMI 患者的电子数据。入院时间为周一至周五上午 8:00 至下午 6:00(非国家法定节假日)。结果共有 439 名患者(36%)在上班时间入院,783 名患者(64%)在下班时间入院。两组患者的基线特征非常均衡,包括心源性休克患者的比例(上班时间 5% 对下班时间 4%;P = 0.62)。两组患者从首次医疗接触到再灌注的中位时间没有差异(住院120分钟 vs 非住院123分钟,P = .54),入院时间与院内死亡率(住院5% vs 非住院5%,P = .90)或1年死亡率(住院10% vs 非住院10%,P = .97)之间也没有关联。生存分析表明,上班时间进行 PCI 与下班时间进行 PCI 没有差异(HR,1.1;95%CI,0.74-1.64;P = .64)。结论:在当代急诊网络中,STEMI 患者入院至 PCI 中心的时间与再灌注延迟或死亡率增加无关。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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