Shuduo Zhou, Siwei Xie, Binquan You, Dingcheng Xiang, Weiyi Fang, Michael G Trisolini, Kenneth A Labresh, Sidney C Smith, Zhi-Jie Zheng, Yinzi Jin, Feng Liu, Yong Huo
{"title":"初步经皮冠状动脉介入治疗与现场纤溶治疗对st段抬高型心肌梗死患者的疗效比较:一项准实验研究","authors":"Shuduo Zhou, Siwei Xie, Binquan You, Dingcheng Xiang, Weiyi Fang, Michael G Trisolini, Kenneth A Labresh, Sidney C Smith, Zhi-Jie Zheng, Yinzi Jin, Feng Liu, Yong Huo","doi":"10.1161/JAHA.125.041995","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is the preferred reperfusion strategy compared with onsite fibrinolytic therapy (O-FT) for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction when delivered promptly. However, the contemporaneous data to inform the comparative benefits of primary PCI versus O-FT, especially in developing countries, have been largely understudied.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used data from the National Chest Pain Center Program (NCPCP), the largest nationwide registry in China, including patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction treated with primary PCI or O-FT from January 2016 to December 2022. Patients were matched using propensity scores, and the PCI-related delay was defined as the difference between the observed door-to-wiring time and the door-to-needle time. Mortality outcomes were assessed at different delay intervals (<60 minutes, 60-90 minutes, >90 minutes). Subgroup analyses were conducted based on age, infarction location, and Killip classification.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In 19 334 matched patients, primary PCI demonstrated a significant mortality benefit over O-FT when PCI-related delays were <60 minutes (2.34% versus 6.01%). However, this advantage diminished when delays exceeded 90 minutes. The critical threshold at which PCI lost its mortality benefit was identified as 119.51 minutes (door-to-wiring time - door-to-needle time). Subgroup analyses showed that older patients, patients with anterior infarction, and those with a higher Killip class appeared to have lower equipoise thresholds.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Primary PCI offers a mortality benefit compared with O-FT in patients with timely treated ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, but treatment delays can mitigate this benefit. In settings with prolonged treatment delays, immediate fibrinolysis may be a more effective strategy. Treatment decisions should incorporate both patient characteristics and health care system constraints to optimize ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":54370,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Heart Association","volume":" ","pages":"e041995"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Benefits of Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Onsite Fibrinolytic for Patients With ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Quasi-Experimental Study.\",\"authors\":\"Shuduo Zhou, Siwei Xie, Binquan You, Dingcheng Xiang, Weiyi Fang, Michael G Trisolini, Kenneth A Labresh, Sidney C Smith, Zhi-Jie Zheng, Yinzi Jin, Feng Liu, Yong Huo\",\"doi\":\"10.1161/JAHA.125.041995\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is the preferred reperfusion strategy compared with onsite fibrinolytic therapy (O-FT) for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction when delivered promptly. However, the contemporaneous data to inform the comparative benefits of primary PCI versus O-FT, especially in developing countries, have been largely understudied.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used data from the National Chest Pain Center Program (NCPCP), the largest nationwide registry in China, including patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction treated with primary PCI or O-FT from January 2016 to December 2022. Patients were matched using propensity scores, and the PCI-related delay was defined as the difference between the observed door-to-wiring time and the door-to-needle time. Mortality outcomes were assessed at different delay intervals (<60 minutes, 60-90 minutes, >90 minutes). Subgroup analyses were conducted based on age, infarction location, and Killip classification.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In 19 334 matched patients, primary PCI demonstrated a significant mortality benefit over O-FT when PCI-related delays were <60 minutes (2.34% versus 6.01%). However, this advantage diminished when delays exceeded 90 minutes. The critical threshold at which PCI lost its mortality benefit was identified as 119.51 minutes (door-to-wiring time - door-to-needle time). Subgroup analyses showed that older patients, patients with anterior infarction, and those with a higher Killip class appeared to have lower equipoise thresholds.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Primary PCI offers a mortality benefit compared with O-FT in patients with timely treated ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, but treatment delays can mitigate this benefit. In settings with prolonged treatment delays, immediate fibrinolysis may be a more effective strategy. Treatment decisions should incorporate both patient characteristics and health care system constraints to optimize ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54370,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the American Heart Association\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"e041995\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the American Heart Association\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.125.041995\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Heart Association","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.125.041995","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparative Benefits of Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Onsite Fibrinolytic for Patients With ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Quasi-Experimental Study.
Background: Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is the preferred reperfusion strategy compared with onsite fibrinolytic therapy (O-FT) for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction when delivered promptly. However, the contemporaneous data to inform the comparative benefits of primary PCI versus O-FT, especially in developing countries, have been largely understudied.
Methods: We used data from the National Chest Pain Center Program (NCPCP), the largest nationwide registry in China, including patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction treated with primary PCI or O-FT from January 2016 to December 2022. Patients were matched using propensity scores, and the PCI-related delay was defined as the difference between the observed door-to-wiring time and the door-to-needle time. Mortality outcomes were assessed at different delay intervals (<60 minutes, 60-90 minutes, >90 minutes). Subgroup analyses were conducted based on age, infarction location, and Killip classification.
Results: In 19 334 matched patients, primary PCI demonstrated a significant mortality benefit over O-FT when PCI-related delays were <60 minutes (2.34% versus 6.01%). However, this advantage diminished when delays exceeded 90 minutes. The critical threshold at which PCI lost its mortality benefit was identified as 119.51 minutes (door-to-wiring time - door-to-needle time). Subgroup analyses showed that older patients, patients with anterior infarction, and those with a higher Killip class appeared to have lower equipoise thresholds.
Conclusions: Primary PCI offers a mortality benefit compared with O-FT in patients with timely treated ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, but treatment delays can mitigate this benefit. In settings with prolonged treatment delays, immediate fibrinolysis may be a more effective strategy. Treatment decisions should incorporate both patient characteristics and health care system constraints to optimize ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction outcomes.
期刊介绍:
As an Open Access journal, JAHA - Journal of the American Heart Association is rapidly and freely available, accelerating the translation of strong science into effective practice.
JAHA is an authoritative, peer-reviewed Open Access journal focusing on cardiovascular and cerebrovascular disease. JAHA provides a global forum for basic and clinical research and timely reviews on cardiovascular disease and stroke. As an Open Access journal, its content is free on publication to read, download, and share, accelerating the translation of strong science into effective practice.