Annals of Emergency Medicine
Volume 52, Issue 6 , Pages 665-676, December 2008

Transferring Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction for Mechanical Reperfusion: A Meta-Regression Analysis of Randomized Trials

  • Giuseppe De Luca, MD, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Division of Cardiology, Maggiore della Carità Hospital, Eastern Piedmont University A. Avogadro, Novara, Italy
    • Corresponding Author InformationAddress for correspondence: Giuseppe De Luca, MD, PhD, Division of Cardiology, Maggiore della Carità Hospital, Eastern Piedmont University A. Avogadro, Novara, Italy; 39-0321-3733141, fax 39-0321-3733407
  • ,
  • Giuseppe Biondi-Zoccai, MD

      Affiliations

    • Division of Cardiology, University of Turin, Turin, Italy
  • ,
  • Paolo Marino, MD

      Affiliations

    • Division of Cardiology, Maggiore della Carità Hospital, Eastern Piedmont University A. Avogadro, Novara, Italy

Received 16 February 2008; received in revised form 5 July 2008, 30 July 2008 and 21 August 2008; accepted 29 August 2008.

Study objective

Primary angioplasty is associated with benefits in survival as compared with thrombolysis among patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). However, in daily practice only a minority of STEMI patients are admitted to 24-hour primary percutaneous coronary intervention hospitals. A previous meta-analysis failed to show significant benefits in terms of survival, potentially because of a limited statistical power. Thus, the aim of the current study is to perform an updated meta-analysis of randomized trials to evaluate whether transfer for primary angioplasty provides significant benefits in terms of survival compared with on-site thrombolysis among STEMI patients.

Methods

The literature was scanned by formal searches of electronic databases (MEDLINE, CENTRAL, EMBASE) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials (http://www.mrw.interscience.wiley.com/cochrane/Cochrane_clcentral_articles_ fs.html) from January 1990 to April 2008. The following key words were used: “randomized trial;” “myocardial infarction;” “reperfusion;” “thrombolysis;” “primary angioplasty;” “angioplasty;” “mechanical reperfusion;” “facilitation;” “transfer;” “transportation;” “mortality;” and “survival.” Inclusion criteria were (1) randomized comparison between on-site thrombolysis and transferring for primary angioplasty; and (2) complete data on mortality. We did not exclude trials or trial arms that specifically addressed transfer for percutaneous coronary intervention after thrombolysis. Crude data were extracted by 2 investigators. No language restrictions were enforced. The relationship between benefits in mortality and reinfarction, baseline mortality of the thrombolytic group in each study (study level variable), and percutaneous coronary intervention-related time delay was evaluated by using a weighted least-square regression.

Results

A total of 11 randomized trials were identified, including 5,741 patients (51.8% transferred for primary angioplasty and 48.2% treated with thrombolysis). Transfer for primary angioplasty was associated with a significant reduction in mortality (5.6% versus 6.8%; P=.02), reinfarction (2.1% versus 4.7%; P<.0001 and stroke (0.7% versus 1.7%, P=.0005) at 30-day follow-up. The benefits in mortality and reinfarction of transfer for primary percutaneous coronary intervention over thrombolysis were not significantly related to baseline mortality of the lytic group or to percutaneous coronary intervention-related time delay.

Conclusion

This meta-analysis demonstrates that, among STEMI patients, transfer for mechanical reperfusion is associated, in addition to benefits in reinfarction and stroke, with a significant reduction in mortality at 30-day follow-up.

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 Supervising editors: Deborah B. Diercks, MD; Judd E. Hollander, MD

 Funding and support: By Annals policy, all authors are required to disclose any and all commercial, financial, and other relationships in any way related to the subject of this article that might create any potential conflict of interest. The authors have stated that no such relationships exist. See the Manuscript Submission Agreement in this issue for examples of specific conflicts covered by this statement.

 Earn CME Credit: Continuing Medical Education for this article is available at: www.ACEP-EMedHome.com.

 Reprints not available from the authors.

PII: S0196-0644(08)01720-4

doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2008.08.033

Annals of Emergency Medicine
Volume 52, Issue 6 , Pages 665-676, December 2008