Early Activation to Speed-Up Treatment of Infarcted Patients

Cath lab activation—and everything that entails—within 20 minutes was associated with the target of performing primary angioplasty in under 2 hours in at least 75% of patients.

Claves para mejorar la productividad en la sala de cateterismo

Historically, door-to-balloon time was measured, which provided a rough idea of where there could be flaws to fix. This is particularly true in the case of patients who need to be transferred to a higher-complexity facility where a primary angioplasty can be performed.

When these times are extended, interventional cardiologists claim that they were called in late, while clinical cardiologists state that the former arrived late at the hospital. This is a recurrent argument the following morning, when times and results are audited.

There might be multiple confounding factors in delays, so the novelty of this research is having measured the activation time, which provides an objective figure to improve practice.

Measuring cath lab activation time is new in the process of improving primary angioplasty in infarcted patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.


Read also: Is Medical Treatment Better at Lowering Bleeding-Caused Mortality than Angioplasty?


The aim of this work was to determine whether faster activation could mean faster reperfusion, especially in patients who need to be transferred. Having the procedure room ready when the patient is still in the ambulance does not make sense.

From 2015 to 2017, 2063 patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction requiring inter-hospital transfer for primary angioplasty were treated in 12 vastly different geographical areas of the United States.

Patients were stratified according to cath lab activation time (time between arrival to the first facility and cath lab activation in the second center). Mean time was 26 minutes, with over 60% of the population at above 20 minutes.


Read also: Infarction, Stroke and Aortic Emergency Syndromes in the Shadow of the Pandemic.


Cath lab activation within 20 minutes meant faster transfers (40 vs. 68 minutes) and faster reperfusions (98 vs. 135 minutes).

The targeted reperfusion within 120 minutes stated in the guidelines could be met in 80.1% of the population with early activation vs. only 39% of patients when activation took over 20 minutes.

The authors of this paper (recently published in Circ. Cardiovasc. Qual. Outcomes) never imagined the arrival of the new coronavirus. The pandemic has interrupted reperfusion time auditing, and even scientific societies recommend to “tolerate delays” to conduct adequate epidemiological evaluations or even prescribe thrombolysis (unprecedented suggestions in unprecedented times).

Conclusion

Measuring cath lab activation time is a useful tool to significantly improve reperfusion time.

Original Title: Catheterization Laboratory Activation Time in Patients Transferred With ST-Segment– Elevation Myocardial Infarction. Insights From the Mission: Lifeline STEMI Accelerator-2 Project.

Reference: Michel Zeitouni et al. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2020;13:e006204. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.119.006204.


Subscribe to our weekly newsletter

Get the latest scientific articles on interventional cardiology

We are interested in your opinion. Please, leave your comments, thoughts, questions, etc., below. They will be most welcome.

More articles by this author

High Ischaemic Risk Criteria in Chronic Coronary Syndrome: Prevalence and Prognosis

Despite advances in the management of chronic coronary syndrome (CCS), including the widespread use of drug-eluting stents (DES) and the optimization of medical therapy,...

ACC 2026 | DKCRUSH VIII: IVUS or angiography to guide PCI in complex coronary bifurcations

Intracoronary imaging guidance has become an established recommended strategy in complex coronary lesions. In the specific setting of complex bifurcations, uncertainty remained regarding the...

ACC 2026 | OPTIMAL: IVUS Guidance in PCI of the Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is considered an equivalent alternative to coronary artery bypass surgery in patients with left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenosis and...

ACC 2026 | IVUS-CHIP Trial: Intravascular ultrasound–guided versus angiography-guided complex PCI

Optimization of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in complex lesions remains a relevant clinical challenge. In this context, the IVUS-CHIP trial was designed to evaluate...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

Mechanical thrombectomy versus anticoagulation in intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism: systematic review and meta-analysis

Intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism (PE) has anticoagulation as the standard treatment, while reperfusion strategies remain a matter of debate. In this context, mechanical thrombectomy has...

High Ischaemic Risk Criteria in Chronic Coronary Syndrome: Prevalence and Prognosis

Despite advances in the management of chronic coronary syndrome (CCS), including the widespread use of drug-eluting stents (DES) and the optimization of medical therapy,...

Management of Valve Thrombosis in TAVI: Current Evidence-Based Approach

The expansion of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) into younger and lower-risk populations has brought bioprosthetic valve thrombosis to the forefront as a clinically...