Skip to main content
Log in

Präklinische Strategien zur Optimierung der Behandlung von Patienten mit ST-Hebungsinfarkten

Preclinical strategies for optimizing ST elevation myocardial infarction treatment

  • Originalarbeit
  • Published:
Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin

Zusammenfassung

Ziele

Das Outcome von Myokardinfarktpatienten kann durch eine frühzeitige Koronarintervention verbessert werden. Daher spielt die Optimierung des präklinischen Behandlungsablaufs eine entscheidende Rolle. Wir untersuchten den Einfluss einer Verfahrensanweisung für den Notarztdienst auf die Zeit bis zur Reperfusion und die Zahl korrekter präklinischer Diagnosen.

Methoden

Bei Patienten mit akutem Koronarsyndrom (ACS) wurde am Notfallort ein 12-Kanal-EKG geschrieben. Ein ST-Hebungsinfarkt (STEMI) wurde angenommen bei ST-Hebungen >0,1 mV in den Extremitätenableitungen, >0,2 mV in zwei benachbarten Brustwandableitungen oder einem neu aufgetretenen Linksschenkelblock. Bei Vorliegen eines STEMI wurde das Herzkatheterteam des jeweiligen Krankenhauses vom Notarzt direkt alarmiert. Die Diagnose wurde von zwei Kardiologen überprüft und das Ergebnis dem ärztlichen Leiter des Rettungsdienstes rückgemeldet.

Ergebnisse

Bei 70 Patienten mit ACS war die vom Notarzt gestellte Diagnose STEMI in 63% der Fälle korrekt; 91,5% dieser Patienten wurden koronarangiographiert, 75,8% erhielten eine PCI, 6% eine aortokoronare Bypassoperation. Zusätzlich wurde bei 100 als STEMI in unserem Zentrum angemeldeten Patienten die innerklinische Versorgungszeit („Door-to-balloon“-Zeit) analysiert. Sie lag im Mittel bei 48 min, davon betrug die Zeit bis zum Start der Koronarangiographie 25 min. Vom Notruf bis zur Wiedereröffnung des Infarktgefäßes wurden durchschnittlich 105 min benötigt.

Diskussion

Ein präklinischer Behandlungsalgorithmus ist sinnvoll für die Versorgung von STEMI-Patienten, jedoch ist ein intensives Training der Notärzte notwendig, um unnötige Alarmierungen der Herzkatheterteams zu vermeiden. Eine schnelle präklinische Diagnosestellung, die Optimierung der „Door-to-balloon“-Zeiten sowie die Minimierung der Behandlungszeit tragen zur Verbesserung des Outcome von Infarktpatienten bei.

Abstract

Aims

The outcome of myocardial infarction patients depends largely on the early reperfusion of the occluded coronary artery. Timely optimal processing by the emergency medical staff plays a key role. We studied the effect of a preclinical algorithm for the treatment of ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients in a physician-staffed ambulance service on the time to reperfusion and the number of correct preclinical diagnoses.

Methods

A 12-channel ECG was conducted in all patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) by the ambulance physician. STEMI was assumed if ST elevations >0.1 mV in the limb leads, ST elevations >0.2 mV in two adjacent chest leads, or a newly occurring left bundle branch block was observed. In this case, the emergency physician alarmed the percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) team and reported the case to the emergency medical director of the fire department. The STEMI diagnosis was checked by two independent cardiologists.

Results

In 70 patients with acute myocardial infarction, 63% of the preclinical STEMI diagnoses were correct. Coronary angiography was performed in 91.5% of the patients, while 75.8% received PCI and 6% underwent bypass surgery. Furthermore, 100 patients registered by the acute myocardial infarction hotline were analyzed regarding the required door-to-balloon times. The average door-to-balloon time in these patients was 48 minutes, while the median time from hospital admission to start of coronary angiography was 25 minutes. From the emergency call to re-opening of the infarct vessel, an average of 105 minutes was required.

Discussion

An algorithm for the preclinical management of STEMI is useful but requires intensive training of the emergency physicians. Reducing the lag time between ambulance activation and PCI clearly helps to improve outcome in patients with ACS. Simultaneously, it may help to preserve resources by avoiding unnecessary alarming of the interventional team.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Abb. 1
Abb. 2
Abb. 3
Abb. 4
Abb. 5

Literatur

  1. Boersma E, Maas AC, Deckers JW et al (1996) Early thrombolytic treatment in acute myocardial infarction: reappraisal of the golden hour. Lancet 348:771–775

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Cannon CP, Gibson CM, Lambrew CT et al (2000) Relationship of symptom-onset-to-balloon time and door-to-balloon time with mortality in patients undergoing angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction. JAMA 283:2941–2947

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Keeley EC, Boura JA, Grines CL (2006) Comparison of primary and facilitated percutaneous coronary interventions for ST-elevation myocardial infarction: quantitative review of randomised trials. Lancet 367:579–588

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Assessment of the Safety and Efficacy of a New Treatment Strategy with Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (ASSENT-4 PCI) Investigators (2006) Primary versus tenecteplase-facilitated percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction (ASSENT-4 PCI): randomised trial. Lancet 367:569–578

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bradley EH, Herrin J, Wang Y et al (2006) Strategies for reducing the door-to-balloon time in acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 355:2308–2320

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Nallamothu BK, Bates ER, Herrin J et al (2005) Times to treatment in transfer patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention in the United States: National Registry of Myocardial Infarction (NRMI)-3/4 analysis. Circulation 111:761–767

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Hamm CW (2004) Guidelines: Acute coronary syndrome (ACS). II: Acute coronary syndrome with ST-elevation. Z Kardiol 93:324–341

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Van de Werf F, Bax J, Betriu A et al (2008) Management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with persistent ST-segment elevation: the Task Force on the Management of ST-Segment Elevation Acute Myocardial Infarction of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J 29:2909–2945

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Aversano T, Aversano LT, Passamani E et al (2002) Thrombolytic therapy vs primary percutaneous coronary intervention for myocardial infarction in patients presenting to hospitals without on-site cardiac surgery: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 287:1943–1951

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. García E, Elízaga J, Pérez-Castellano N et al (1999) Primary angioplasty versus systemic thrombolysis in anterior myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol 33:605–611

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Grines CL, Browne KF, Marco J et al (1993) A comparison of immediate angioplasty with thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction. The Primary Angioplasty in Myocardial Infarction Study Group. N Eng J Med 328:673–679

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Keeley EC, Hillis LD (2007) Primary PCI for myocardial infarction with ST-segment elevation. N Eng J Med 356:47–54

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Van de Werf F, Ardissino D, Betriu A et al (2003) Management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation. The Task Force on the Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J 24:28–66

    Google Scholar 

  14. Silber S, Herdeg C (2008) Drug-eluting stents for diabetic patients. A critical appraisal of the currently available data from randomized trials. Herz 33:196–205

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Keeley EC, Boura JA, Grines CL (2003) Primary angioplasty versus intravenous thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction: a quantitative review of 23 randomised trials. Lancet 361:13–20

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Andersen HR, Nielsen TT, Rasmussen K et al (2003) A comparison of coronary angioplasty with fibrinolytic therapy in acute myocardial infarction. N Eng J Med 349:733–742

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Widimský P, Budesínský T, Vorác D et al (2003) Long distance transport for primary angioplasty vs immediate thrombolysis in acute myocardial infarction. Final results of the randomized national multicentre trial-PRAGUE-2. Eur Heart J 24:94–104

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Rosenkranz S, Maier LS, Maack C, Böhm M (2007) Hotline update of clinical trials and registries presented at the German Cardiac Society Meeting 2007: 2L-Registry, Kardio-Pro, EVER, AFFECT, VTACH, ARTS II, OPTAMI, PEPCAD I, PEPCAD II, GERSHWIN, SPICE, FIX-CHF and CREDIT. Clin Res Cardiol 96:457–468

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Duchateau FX, Devaud ML, Burnod A et al (2007) A quality control programme for acute myocardial infarction management in out-of-hospital critical care medicine. Emerg Med J 24:487–488

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Interessenkonflikt

Die korrespondierende Autorin gibt an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P. Lebiedz.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lebiedz, P., Radke, R., Bohn, A. et al. Präklinische Strategien zur Optimierung der Behandlung von Patienten mit ST-Hebungsinfarkten. Intensivmed 48, 130–134 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00390-011-0256-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00390-011-0256-z

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Navigation