Initiating thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction: whose job is it anyway?

Although thrombolytic therapy has clearly become the standard of care for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), its delivery in Canada continues to be extremely variable. Significant unnecessary delays in the initiation of this treatment still occur in many hospitals and constitute the most common avoidable cause of death in patients with AMI. The authors agree with the statement by representatives of the member organizations of the Emergency Cardiac Care Coalition (see pages 483 to 487 of this issue) that emergency service providers must get patients to hospital sooner and that all eligible patients should receive thrombolytic therapy within 30 minutes of their arrival at hospital. This objective requires that thrombolytic therapy be initiated by emergency physicians and be supported by well-established guidelines for its use.     

Thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction

A retrospective analysis of 4,094 deliveries among Navajo Indian women was carried out to determine the prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus and diabetes antedating pregnancy. Three data sources--a local prenatal registry, a delivery room log, and hospital discharge records--were evaluated for their usefulness as surveillance systems for gestational diabetes. In all, 177 cases of gestational diabetes and 13 cases of preexisting diabetes were identified, giving a prevalence of maternal diabetes in pregnancy of 4.6%. When women with preexisting diabetes or documented gestational diabetes during a previous pregnancy were excluded, the prevalence of gestational diabetes during the study period was 3.4%. Although each data source used separately failed to identify 20% to 40% of diabetic pregnancies, more than 97% of cases were identified using a combination of the prenatal registry and the delivery log.     

Time to treatment with thrombolytic therapy: determinants and effect on short-term nonfatal outcomes of acute myocardial infarction

OBJECTIVES: To characterize the extent of delay in administration of thrombolytic therapy to patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in Canada, to examine patient-specific predictors of such delay and to measure the effect of delay on short-term nonfatal cardiac outcomes. DESIGN: Secondary cohort analysis of data from the first international Global Utilization of Streptokinase and tPA for Occluded Coronary Arteries (GUSTO-I) trial. SETTING: Sixty-three acute care hospitals across Canada. SUBJECTS: All 2898 Canadian patients with an AMI enrolled in GUSTO-I. MAIN OUTCOMES: Time before arrival at a hospital ("symptom-to-door" time) and time from arrival to administration of therapy ("door-to-needle" time) for patients who had an AMI outside of a hospital, in clinically relevant categories; proportions of patients with nonfatal, serious cardiac events, including shock, sustained ventricular tachycardia, ventricular fibrillation and asystole. RESULTS: Of the total number of patients enrolled, records were complete for 2708; 2542 of these patients (93.9%) had an AMI outside of a hospital. These 2542 patients presented a median 81 (interquartile range 50 to 130) minutes after the onset of symptoms, and the median time to treatment in hospital was 85 (interquartile range 61 to 115) minutes. Whereas a greater proportion of Canadian patients than of patients enrolled in GUSTO-I in other countries reached hospital within 2 hours of symptom onset (71.5% v. 61.2%, p < 0.001), a greater proportion of Canadian patients experienced in-hospital treatment delays of more than 1 hour (75.3% v. 57.1%, p < 0.001). In an analysis of all 2708 patients with complete records, both the unadjusted and adjusted odds of nonfatal cardiac events for those treated 4 to 6 hours after symptom onset were significantly higher than for those treated within 2 hours (odds ratio 1.60, 95% confidence interval 1.09 to 2.37). CONCLUSION: After arrival at a hospital, Canadian patients enrolled in GUSTO-I received thrombolytic therapy more slowly than trial enrollees in other countries. Such delays are already known to decrease the rate of short-term survival after AMI. The findings further show that long time to treatment also increases the odds of nonfatal, serious cardiac events. Hospitals and physicians caring for patients with AMI should routinely assess whether and how they can improve door-to-needle times.     

General practitioners' management of acute myocardial infarction and cardiac arrest: relevance to thrombolytic treatment.

A questionnaire was sent to 61 general practitioners who had participated 18 months previously in a study of their experience of cardiopulmonary resuscitation and defibrillation in acute myocardial infarction. Fifty (82%) replies were received. Only 16 of the 50 respondents thought that every general practitioner should have a defibrillator, but 46 thought that every group practice should have one. Most practitioners felt the need for more tuition and practice in advanced life support, but 15 did not have the practice defibrillator with them when on call. Only nine doctors normally had an electrocardiograph with them when on call, most relying on clinical acumen to make an operational diagnosis; there appeared to be reluctance to use any drugs other than opiates and atropine in the management of acute myocardial infarction. This study highlights the difficulty of maintaining readiness to deal effectively with myocardial infarction in the community and the problems of relying on the electrocardiogram in deciding who should be given thrombolytic treatment.     

Guidelines for the use of intravenous thrombolytic agents in acute myocardial infarction. Ontario Medical Association Consensus Group on Thrombolytic Therapy.

A consensus group convened under the auspices of the Ontario Medical Association produced guidelines for the use of intravenous thrombolytic agents in acute myocardial infarction. The guidelines, updated to December 1988, include the following points. 1) Any hospital that routinely accepts the responsibility for looking after patients with acute myocardial infarction could offer thrombolytic therapy if monitoring facilities are available and if the staff are experienced in the treatment of cardiac rhythm disturbances. 2) Before treatment, all patients must be carefully screened for factors predisposing to hemorrhagic complications. 3) A physician should be clearly designated as responsible for the care of the patient receiving an infusion and be available in the event of problems. 4) For the two approved agents the usual dosages are as follows: streptokinase, 1.5 million units given over 1 hour; and tissue-type plasminogen activator (tPA), 100 mg over 3 hours, delivered as 60 mg in the first hour (of which 6 to 7 mg should be given as a bolus in the first 1 to 2 minutes) and then an infusion of 20 mg/h over the next 2 hours. 5) Intravenous thrombolytics should be considered for any patient with presumed acute myocardial infarction, as suggested by prolonged chest pain or other appropriate symptoms and typical electrocardiographic changes. Expeditious treatment is critical, since myocardial necrosis occurs within hours. 6) Emergency angiography is indicated for patients with hemodynamic compromise and no apparent response to streptokinase or tPA and in those with recurrent chest pain suggestive of acute myocardial infarction despite an apparent response to intravenous thrombolysis. Angiography before discharge is recommended for patients with postinfarction angina or evidence from noninvasive testing of significant residual ischemic risk. 7) There is insufficient evidence to choose between streptokinase and tPA on the basis of the two most important outcome measures: patient survival and myocardial preservation. More conclusive evidence comparing tPA, streptokinase and another promising agent, acylated plasminogen-streptokinase activator complex, will be available in 1989-90.     

Prospective register of primary percutaneous coronary interventions in patients with acute myocardial infarction

The present study has evaluated the immediate angiographic results of primary percutaneous interventions (PCI) in patients with acute myocardial infarction, as well as hospital and 6-month clinical outcomes. The analysis covered a total of 265 patients (females (23%) and males (77%)); their mean age was 57+/-11 years. The mean time before the first balloon dilatation during PCI was 278+/-135 minutes after the development of the pain syndrome or 109+/-94 minutes after hospital admission. PCI proved to be effective in 96% of the patients, as evidenced by angiography. TIMI 3 blood flow was achieved in 83% of cases during PCI. After primary PCI, hospital mortality was 98.9% and 95% survived 6 months. At 6-month follow-up, 22% patients had positive exercise tests, recurrent angina pectoris and/or more than 50% luminal stenosis of the infarct-related artery. Control angiography made less than 6 months later showed 11% restenosis. This prospective study has demonstrated the high immediate and long effectiveness and safety of primary interventions in acute myocardial infarction.     

Coronary revascularization after thrombolytic therapy for myocardial infarction: what caseloads could Canadian centres face?

A simple model was developed to project the potential effect of intravenous thrombolytic therapy on the caseloads of revascularization early after acute myocardial infarction. Published data were used to estimate the proportion of infarct patients eligible for thrombolytic treatment and their subsequent rates of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) or coronary artery bypass surgery (CABS) within 2 weeks and up to 6 to 12 weeks after treatment. Toronto regional caseload data were obtained from registries and hospital discharge records. Our primary projections, based only on coronary angiography for evidence of spontaneous or exercise-induced ischemia, suggest a 165% increase in the post-thrombolysis use of PTCA within 2 weeks of infarction and even greater increases 6 to 12 weeks after infarction. Adding in selective use of salvage PTCA for some patients with persisting pain despite thrombolysis increases the overall PTCA caseload within 2 weeks by 242%. Data on the current caseload of post-thrombolysis CABS are unavailable. However, our projected caseload for the 30% of infarct patients treated with thrombolytic drugs equals or exceeds the current number of CABS procedures performed on all infarct patients within a month of the event. All these projections are conservative, in that they consider neither procedures 3 to 12 months after infarction nor restenosis after PTCA. This analysis illustrates that current approaches to revascularization after thrombolytic therapy could have a substantial effect on PTCA and CABS caseloads. Further studies with improved caseload data are needed to validate these preliminary projections.