Emergency Medical Services Management of ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction

References

• American Heart Association. Heart Disease andStroke Statistics—2007 Update [pamphlet]. 2007. American Heart Association, Dallas, TX 2007
   Google Scholar
• Keeley E C, Boura J A, Grines C L. Primary angioplasty versus intravenous thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction: a quantitative review of 23 randomised trials. Lancet 2003; 361: 13–20
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Indications for fibrinolytic therapy in suspected acute myocardial infarction: collaborative overview of early mortality andmajor morbidity results from all randomised trials of more than 1000 patients. Fibrinolytic Therapy Trialists' (FTT) Collaborative Group. Lancet 1994; 343: 311–22
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McGinn A P, Rosamond W D, Goff D C, Jr, Taylor H A, Miles J S, Chambless L. Trends in prehospital delay time anduse of emergency medical services for acute myocardial infarction: experience in 4 US communities from 1987–2000. Am Heart J 2005; 150: 392–400
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Association of EMS Physicians. Prehospital management of acute myocardial infarction [position paper]. Prehosp Emerg Care 2008; 12: 393–394
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deluca G, Suryapranata H, Ottervanger J P, Antman E M. Time delay to treatment andmortality in primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction: every minute of delay counts. Circulation 2004; 109: 1223–5
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Moser D K, Kimble L P, Alberts M J, et al. Reducing delay in seeking treatment by patients with acute coronary syndrome andstroke: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association Council on Cardiovascular Nursing andStroke Council. Circulation 2006; 114: 168–82
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ratner P A, Tzianetas R, Tu A W, et al. Myocardial infarction symptom recognition by the lay public: the role of gender andethnicity. J Epidemiol Community Health 2006; 60: 606–15
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dracup K, McKinley S, Riegel B, Mieschke H, Doering L V, Moser D K. A nursing intervention to reduce prehospital delay in acute coronary syndrome: a randomized clinical trial. J. Cardiovasc Nurs 2006; 21: 186–93
   Google Scholar
• Limbu Y R, Malla R, Regmi S R, et al. Public knowledge of heart attack in a Nepalese population survey. Heart Lung 2006; 35: 164–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luepker R V, Raczynski J M, Osganian S, et al. Effect of a community intervention on patient delay andemergency medical service use in acute coronary heart disease: The Rapid Early Action for Coronary Treatment (REACT) Trial. JAMA 2000; 284: 60–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kerr D, Holden D, Smith J, Kelly A M, Bunker S. Predictors of ambulance use in patients with acute myocardial infarction in Australia. Emerg Med J 2006; 23: 948–52
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Canto J G, Zalenski R J, Ornato J P, et al. Use of emergency medical services in acute myocardial infarction andsubsequent quality of care: observations from the National Registry of Myocardial Infarction 2. Circulation 2002; 106: 3018–23
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodacre S, Kelly A M, Kerr D. Potential impact of interventions to reduce times to thrombolysis. Emerg Med J 2004; 21: 625–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gupta M, Tabas J A, Kohn M A. Presenting complaint among patients with myocardial infarction who present to an urban, public hospital emergency department. Ann Emerg Med 2002; 40: 180–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McSweeney J C, Cody M, O'Sullivan P, Elberson K, Moser D K, Garvin B J. Women's early warning symptoms of acute myocardial infarction. Circulation 2003; 108: 2619–23
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hargarten K M, Aprahamian C, Stueven H, Olson D W, Aufderheide T P, Mateer J R. Limitations of prehospital predictors of acute myocardial infarction andunstable angina. Ann Emerg Med 1987; 16: 1325–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 2005 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation andEmergency Cardiovascular Care. Circulation 2005; 112: IV1–203
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morrison L J, Brooks S, Sawadsky B, McDonald A, Verbeek P R. Prehospital 12-lead electrocardiography impact on acute myocardial infarction treatment times andmortality: a systematic review. Acad Emerg Med 2006; 13: 84–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Armstrong P W, Bogaty P, Buller C E, Dorian P, O'Neill B J. The 2004 ACC/AHA Guidelines: a perspective andadaptation for Canada by the Canadian Cardiovascular Society Working Group. Can J Cardiol 2004; 20: 1075–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van d e, Werf F, Ardissino D, Betriu A, et al. 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 2003; 24: 28–66
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adgey A A, Geddes J S, Mulholland H C, Keegan D A, Pantridge J F. Incidence, significance, andmanagement of early bradyarrhythmia complicating acute myocardial infarction. Lancet 1968; 2: 1097–101
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scrutinio D, De Toma L, Mangini S G, et al. Ischaemia related ventricular arrhythmias in patients with variant angina pectoris. Eur Heart J 1984; 5: 1013–22
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swart G, Brady W J, Jr, DeBehnke D J, Ma O J, Aufderheide T P. Acute myocardial infarction complicated by hemodynamically unstable bradyarrhythmia: prehospital andED treatment with atropine. Am J Emerg Med 1999; 17: 647–52
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pace S A, Fuller F P, Dahlgren T J. Paramedic decisions with placement of out-of-hospital intravenous lines. Am J Emerg Med 1999; 17: 544–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slovis C M, Herr E W, Londorf D, Little T D, Alexander B R, Guthmann R J. Success rates for initiation of intravenous therapy en route by prehospital care providers. Am J Emerg Med 1990; 8: 305–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kenmure A C, Murdoch W R, Beattie A D, Marshall J C, Cameron A J. Circulatory andmetabolic effects of oxygen in myocardial infarction. Br Med J 1968; 4: 360–4
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Baron J F, Vicaut E, Hou X, Duvelleroy M. Independent role of arterial O2 tension in local control of coronary blood flow. Am J Physiol 1990; 258: H1388–H1394
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Brandenburg M A. The utility of oxygen in myocardial infarction. J Emerg Med 2000; 19: 63–5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Madias J E, Madias N E, Hood W B, Jr. Precordial ST-segment mapping. 2. Effects of oxygen inhalation on ischemic injury in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Circulation 1976; 53: 411–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Libby P. Current concepts of the pathogenesis of the acute coronary syndromes. Circulation 2001; 104: 365–72
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Libby P, Theroux P. Pathophysiology of coronary artery disease. Circulation 2005; 111: 3481–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barbash I M, Freimark D, Gottlieb S, et al. Outcome of myocardial infarction in patients treated with aspirin is enhanced by pre-hospital administration. Cardiology 2002; 98: 141–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horowitz J D. Role of nitrates in unstable angina pectoris. Am J Cardiol 1992; 70: 64B–71B
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parratt J R. Nitroglycerin—the first one hundred years: new facts about an old drug. J Pharm Pharmacol 1979; 31: 801–9
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Stratton M A. Use of nitrates in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Clin Pharm 1984; 3: 32–9
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Flaherty J T. Role of nitrates in acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol 1987; 60: 35H–38H
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Meine T J, Roe M T, Chen A Y, et al. Association of intravenous morphine use andoutcomes in acute coronary syndromes: results from the CRUSADE Quality Improvement Initiative. Am Heart J 2005; 149: 1043–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taher T, Fu Y, Wagner G S, et al. Aborted myocardial infarction in patients with ST-segment elevation: insights from the Assessment of the Safety andEfficacy of a New Thrombolytic Regimen-3 Trial Electrocardiographic Substudy. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004; 44: 38–43
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grzybowski M, Clements E A, et al. Mortality benefit of immediate revascularization of acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction in patients with contraindications to thrombolytic therapy: a propensity analysis. JAMA 2003; 290: 1891–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Juliard J M, Himbert D, Golmard J L, et al. Can we provide reperfusion therapy to all unselected patients admitted with acute myocardial infarction?. J Am Coll Cardiol 1997; 30: 157–64
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson J L, Karagounis L A, Becker L C, Sorensen S G, Menlove R L. TIMI perfusion grade 3 but not grade 2 results in improved outcome after thrombolysis for myocardial infarction. Ventriculographic, enzymatic, andelectrocardiographic evidence from the TEAM-3 Study. Circulation 1993; 87: 1829–39
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Primary versus tenecteplase-facilitated percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction (ASSENT-4 PCI): randomised trial. Lancet 2006; 367: 569–78
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The effects of tissue plasminogen activator, streptokinase, or both on coronary-artery patency, ventricular function, andsurvival after acute myocardial infarction. The GUSTO Angiographic Investigators. N Engl J Med 1993; 329: 1615–22
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibson C M, Karha J, Murphy S A, et al. Early andlong-term clinical outcomes associated with reinfarction following fibrinolytic administration in the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction trials. J Am Coll Cardiol 2003; 42: 7–16
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Antman E M, Anbe D T, Armstrong P W, et al. ACC/AHA guidelines for the management of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction—executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the 1999 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction). Circulation 2004; 110: 588–636
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boden W E, Eagle K, Granger C B. Reperfusion strategies in acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a comprehensive review of contemporary management options. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007; 50: 917–29
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pinto D S, Kirtane A J, Nallamothu B K, et al. Hospital delays in reperfusion for ST-elevation myocardial infarction: implications when selecting a reperfusion strategy. Circulation 2006; 114: 2019–25
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steg P G, Bonnefoy E, Chabaud S, et al. Impact of time to treatment on mortality after prehospital fibrinolysis or primary angioplasty: data from the CAPTIM randomized clinical trial. Circulation 2003; 108: 2851–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Widimsky P, Budesinsky T, Vorac D, et al. 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 2003; 24: 94–104
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zahn R, Schiele R, Gitt A K, et al. Impact of prehospital delay on mortality in patients with acute myocardial infarction treated with primary angioplasty andintravenous thrombolysis. Am Heart J 2001; 142: 105–11
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Antman E M, Anbe D T, Armstrong P W, et al. ACC/AHA guidelines for the management of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction—executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the 1999 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction). Circulation 2004; 110: 588–636
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hochman J S, Sleeper L A, White H D, et al. One-year survival following early revascularization for cardiogenic shock. JAMA 2001; 285: 190–2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hochman J S, Sleeper L A, Webb J G, et al. Early revascularization andlong-term survival in cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction. JAMA 2006; 295: 2511–5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Widimsky P, Groch L, Zelizko M, Aschermann M, Bednar F, Suryapranata H. Multicentre randomized trial comparing transport to primary angioplasty vs immediate thrombolysis vs combined strategy for patients with acute myocardial infarction presenting to a community hospital without a catheterization laboratory. The PRAGUE study. Eur Heart J 2000; 21: 823–31
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nallamothu B K, Bates E R, Herrin J, Wang Y, Bradley E H, Krumholz H M. 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 2005; 111: 761–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Winter R J, Windhausen F, Cornel J H, et al. Early invasive versus selectively invasive management for acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med 2005; 353: 1095–104
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Polonski L, Gasior M, Wasilewski J, et al. Outcomes of primary coronary angioplasty andangioplasty after initial thrombolysis in the treatment of 374 consecutive patients with acute myocardial infarction. Am Heart J 2003; 145: 855–61
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keeley E C, Boura J A, Grines C L. Comparison of primary andfacilitated percutaneous coronary interventions for ST-elevation myocardial infarction: quantitative review of randomised trials. Lancet 2006; 367: 579–88
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prehospital thrombolytic therapy in patients with suspected acute myocardial infarction. The European Myocardial Infarction Project Group. N Engl J Med 1993; 329: 383–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morrison L J, Verbeek P R, McDonald A C, Sawadsky B V, Cook D J. Mortality andprehospital thrombolysis for acute myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis. JAMA 2000; 283: 2686–92
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weaver W D, Cerqueira M, Hallstrom A P, et al. Prehospital-initiated vs hospital-initiated thrombolytic therapy. The Myocardial Infarction Triage andIntervention Trial. JAMA 1993; 270: 1211–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morrow D A, Antman E M, Sayah A, et al. Evaluation of the time saved by prehospital initiation of reteplase for ST-elevation myocardial infarction: results of The Early Retavase-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (ER-TIMI) 19 trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2002; 40: 71–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bjorklund E, Stenestrand U, Lindback J, Svensson L, Wallentin L, Lindahl B. Pre-hospital thrombolysis delivered by paramedics is associated with reduced time delay andmortality in ambulance-transported real-life patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J 2006; 27: 1146–52
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Welsh R C, Travers A, Senaratne M, Williams R, Armstrong P W. Feasibility andapplicability of paramedic-based prehospital fibrinolysis in a large North American center. Am Heart J 2006; 152: 1007–14
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Health Service, United Kingdom, Available at: http://www.replondon.ac/uk/pubs/books/minap06/index.htm Fifth Public Report from the Myocardial Infarction National Audit Project (MINAP). Royal College of Physicians (England andWales). Accessed September 1, 2007
   Google Scholar
• National Health Service, United Kingdom, Available at: http://www.replondon.ac.uk/pubs/books/minap06/index.htm Fifth Public Report from the Myocardial Infarction National Audit Project (MINAP). Royal College of Physicians (England andWales). Accessed September 1, 2007
   Google Scholar
• National Health Service, United Kingdom, Available at: http://www.replondon.ac/uk/pubs/books/minap06/index.htm Fifth Public Report from the Myocardial Infarction National Audit Project (MINAP). Royal College of Physicians (England andWales). 2007. Accessed September 1, 2007
   Google Scholar
• Danchin N, Blanchard D, Steg P G, et al. Impact of prehospital thrombolysis for acute myocardial infarction on 1-year outcome: results from the French Nationwide USIC 2000 Registry. Circulation 2004; 110: 1909–15
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stenestrand U, Lindback J, Wallentin L. Long-term outcome of primary percutaneous coronary intervention vs prehospital andin-hospital thrombolysis for patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction. JAMA 2006; 296: 1749–56
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lamfers E J, Schut A, Hertzberger D P, et al. Prehospital versus hospital fibrinolytic therapy using automated versus cardiologist electrocardiographic diagnosis of myocardial infarction: abortion of myocardial infarction andunjustified fibrinolytic therapy. Am Heart J 2004; 147: 509–15
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Melchior T, Hallam D, Johansen B E. Aortic dissection in the thrombolytic era: early recognition andoptimal management is a prerequisite for increased survival. Int J Cardiol 1993; 42: 1–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gersh B J, Stone G W, White H D, Holmes D R, Jr. Pharmacological facilitation of primary percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction: is the slope of the curve the shape of the future?. JAMA 2005; 293: 979–86
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bonnefoy E, Lapostolle F, Leizorovicz A, et al. Primary angioplasty versus prehospital fibrinolysis in acute myocardial infarction: a randomised study. Lancet 2002; 360: 825–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Armstrong P W. A comparison of pharmacologic therapy with/without timely coronary intervention vs. primary percutaneous intervention early after ST-elevation myocardial infarction: the WEST (Which Early ST-elevation myocardial infarction Therapy) study. Eur Heart J 2006; 27: 1530–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verheugt F W, Gersh B J, Armstrong P W. Aborted myocardial infarction: a new target for reperfusion therapy. Eur Heart J 2006; 27: 901–4
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dowdy L, Wagner G S, Birnbaum Y, et al. Aborted infarction: the ultimate myocardial salvage. Am Heart J 2004; 147: 390–4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keeley E C, Grines C L. Should patients with acute myocardial infraction be transferred to a tertiary center for primary angioplasty or receive it at qualified hospitals in the community? The case for emergency transfer for primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Circulation 2005; 112: 3520–32
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Nallamothu B K, Wang Y, Magid D J, et al. Relation between hospital specialization with primary percutaneous coronary intervention andclinical outcomes in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: National Registry of Myocardial Infarction-4 analysis. Circulation 2006; 113: 222–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Epstein A J, Rathore S S, Volpp K G, Krumholz H M. Hospital percutaneous coronary intervention volume andpatient mortality, 1998 to 2000: does the evidence support current procedure volume minimums?. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004; 43: 1755–62
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Canto J G, Every N R, Magid D J, et al. The volume of primary angioplasty procedures andsurvival after acute myocardial infarction. National Registry of Myocardial Infarction 2 Investigators. N Engl J Med 2000; 342: 1573–80
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wharton T P, Jr. Should patients with acute myocardial infraction be transferred to a tertiary center for primary angioplasty or receive it at qualified hospitals in community? The case for community hospital angioplasty. Circulation 2005; 112: 3509–20
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Villiers J S, Anderson T, McMeekin J D, Leung R C, Traboulsi M. Expedited transfer for primary percutaneous coronary intervention: a program evaluation. Can Med Assoc J 2007; 176: 1833–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henry T D, Unger B T, Sharkey S W, et al. Design of a standardized system for transfer of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction for percutaneous coronary intervention. Am Heart J 2005; 150: 373–84
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Le May M R, So D Y, Dionne R, et al. A citywide protocol for primary PCI in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 2008; 358: 231–40
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Quinn M J, Fitzgerald D J. Ticlopidine andclopidogrel. Circulation 1999; 100: 1667–72
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sabatine M S, Cannon C P, Gibson C M, et al. Addition of clopidogrel to aspirin andfibrinolytic therapy for myocardial infarction with ST-segment elevation. N Engl J Med 2005; 352: 1179–89
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fox K A, Mehta S R, Peters R, et al. Benefits andrisks of the combination of clopidogrel andaspirin in patients undergoing surgical revascularization for non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome: the Clopidogrel in Unstable angina to prevent Recurrent ischemic Events (CURE) Trial. Circulation 2004; 110: 1202–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steinhubl S R, Berger P B, Mann J T, III, et al. Early andsustained dual oral antiplatelet therapy following percutaneous coronary intervention: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2002; 288: 2411–20
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verheugt F W, Montalescot G, Sabatine M S, et al. Prehospital fibrinolysis with dual antiplatelet therapy in ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction: a substudy of the randomized double blind CLARITY-TIMI 28 trial. J Thromb Thrombolysis 2007; 23: 173–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jollis J G, Roettig M L, Aluko A O, et al. Implementation of a statewide system for coronary reperfusion for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. JAMA 2007; 298: 2371–80
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar