Q-Notes
for Adult Medicine |
STAT |
CARDIOLOGY

http://circ.ahajournals.org/cgi/content/full/110/5/588
http://circ.ahajournals.org/cgi/reprint/110/5/588
(Circulation. 2004;110:588-636.)
© 2004 American Heart Association, Inc.
ACC/AHA Practice Guidelines 2004
|
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)
Developed in Collaboration With the Canadian Cardiovascular
Society
-
I. Introduction
-
II. Pathology 590
-
A. Epidemiology 590
-
III. Management Before STEMI 590
-
A. Identification of Patients at Risk of
STEMI 590
-
B. Patient Education for Early Recognition
and Response to STEMI 590
-
IV. Onset of STEMI 592
-
A. Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest 592
-
V. Prehospital Issues 592
-
A. Emergency Medical Services Systems 592
-
B. Prehospital Chest Pain Evaluation and
Treatment 592
-
C. Prehospital Fibrinolysis 592
-
D. Prehospital Destination Protocols 593
-
VI. Initial Recognition and Management in the Emergency
Department 593
-
A. Optimal Strategies for Emergency
Department Triage 593
-
B. Initial Patient Evaluation 593
-
1. History 595
-
2. Physical Examination
595
-
3. Electrocardiogram 595
-
4. Laboratory Examinations
595
-
5. Biomarkers of Cardiac Damage
595
-
a.
Bedside Testing for Serum Cardiac Biomarkers 596
-
6. Imaging 596
-
C. Management 596
-
1. Routine Measures 596
-
a.
Oxygen 596
-
b.
Nitroglycerin 596
-
c.
Analgesia 596
-
d.
Aspirin 597
-
e.
Beta-Blockers 597
-
f.
Reperfusion 597
-
General Concepts 597
-
Selection of Reperfusion Strategy 597
-
Pharmacological Reperfusion 598
-
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention 600
-
Acute Surgical Reperfusion 605
-
Patients With STEMI Not Receiving Reperfusion 605
-
Assessment of Reperfusion 605
-
Ancillary Therapy 605
-
Other Pharmacological Measures 607
-
VII. Hospital Management 608
-
A. Location 608
-
1. Coronary Care Unit 608
-
2. Stepdown Unit 608
-
B. Early, General Measures 609
-
1. Level of Activity 609
-
2. Diet 609
-
3. Patient Education in
the Hospital Setting 609
-
4. Analgesia/Anxiolytics
609
-
C. Risk Stratification During Early Hospital
Course 609
-
D. Medication Assessment 610
-
1. Beta Blockers 609
-
2. Nitroglycerin 610
-
3. Inhibition of the
Renin-Angiotensin- Aldosterone System 610
-
4. Antiplatelets 611
-
5. Antithrombotics 611
-
6. Oxygen 611
-
E. Estimation of Infarct Size 611
-
1. Electrocardiographic
Techniques 611
-
2. Cardiac Biomarker
Methods 611
-
3. Radionuclide Imaging
611
-
4. Echocardiography 611
-
5. Magnetic Resonance
Imaging 611
-
F. Hemodynamic Disturbances 611
-
1. Hemodynamic Assessment
611
-
2. Hypotension 612
-
3. Low-Output State 612
-
4. Pulmonary Congestion
612
-
5. Cardiogenic Shock 613
-
6. Right Ventricular
Infarction 614
-
7. Mechanical Causes of
Heart Failure/Low- Output Syndrome 614
-
a.
Diagnosis 614
-
b.
Mitral Valve Regurgitation 614
-
c.
Ventricular Septal Rupture After STEMI 615
-
d. Left
Ventricular Free-Wall Rupture 615
-
e. Left
Ventricular Aneurysm 615
-
f.
Mechanical Support of the Failing Heart 615
-
Intra-Aortic Balloon Counterpulsation 615
-
G. Arrhythmias After STEMI 615
-
1. Ventricular Arrhythmias
615
-
a.
Ventricular Fibrillation 615
-
b.
Ventricular Tachycardia 616
-
c.
Ventricular Premature Beats 616
-
d.
Accelerated Idioventricular Rhythms and Accelerated
Junctional Rhythms 616
-
e. ICD
Implantation in Patients After STEMI 617
-
2. Supraventricular
Arrhythmias/Atrial Fibrillation 617
-
3. Bradyarrhythmias 618
-
a.
Acute Treatment of Conduction Disturbances and
Bradyarrhythmias 618
-
Ventricular Asystole 618
-
b. Use
of Permanent Pacemakers 618
-
Permanent Pacing for Bradycardia or Conduction Blocks Associated
With STEMI 618
-
Sinus Node Dysfunction After STEMI 618
-
Pacing Mode Selection in Patients With STEMI 618
-
H. Recurrent Chest Pain After STEMI 618
-
1. Pericarditis 618
-
2. Recurrent
Ischemia/Infarction 620
-
I. Other Complications 621
-
1. Ischemic Stroke 621
-
2. DVT and Pulmonary
Embolism 621
-
J. Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery After
STEMI 621
-
1. Timing of Surgery 621
-
2. Arterial Grafting 621
-
3. CABG for Recurrent
Ischemia After STEMI 621
-
4. Elective CABG Surgery
After STEMI in Patients With Angina 622
-
5. CABG Surgery After
STEMI and Antiplatelet Agents 622
-
K. Convalescence, Discharge, and
Post-Myocardial Infarction Care 622
-
1. Risk Stratification at
Hospital Discharge 622
-
a. Role
of Exercise Testing 622
-
b. Role
of Echocardiography 622
-
c.
Exercise Myocardial Perfusion Imaging 624
-
d. Left
Ventricular Function 624
-
e.
Invasive Evaluation 624
-
f.
Assessment of Ventricular Arrhythmias 624
-
L. Secondary Prevention 625
-
1. Patient Education Before
Discharge 625
-
2. Lipid Management 625
-
3. Weight Management 625
-
4. Smoking Cessation 627
-
5. Antiplatelet Therapy
627
-
6. Inhibition of
Renin-Angiotensin- Aldosterone-System 627
-
7. Beta-Blockers 628
-
8. Blood Pressure Control
628
-
9. Diabetes Management 629
-
10. Hormone Therapy 629
-
11. Warfarin Therapy 629
-
12. Physical Activity 629
-
13. Antioxidants 629
-
VIII. Long-Term Management 630
-
A. Psychosocial Impact of STEMI 630
-
B. Cardiac Rehabilitation 630
-
C. Follow-Up Visit With Medical Provider 630
-
References 631
 |
I. Introduction |
Although considerable improvement has occurred in the process of
care for patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI),
room for improvement
exists.13 The purpose of the present guideline is
to focus on the numerous advances in the diagnosis and management
of patients with STEMI since 1999. This is reflected in the changed
name of the guideline: "ACC/AHA Guidelines for the Management
of Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction." The final
recommendations for indications for a diagnostic procedure, a
particular therapy, or an intervention in patients with STEMI
summarize both clinical evidence and expert opinion
(Table 1). To provide clinicians with a set of
recommendations that can easily be translated into the practice
of caring for patients with STEMI, this guideline is organized
around the chronology of the interface between the patient and
the clinician. The full guideline is available at
http://www.acc.org/clinical/guidelines/stemi/index.htm.
 |
II. Pathology |
A. Epidemiology
STEMI continues to be a significant public health problem in
industrialized countries and is becoming an increasingly significant
problem in developing
countries.4 Although the exact
incidence is difficult to ascertain, using first-listed and
secondary hospital discharge data, there were 1 680 000 unique
discharges for ACS in
2001.5 Applying the conservative estimate
of 30% of the ACS patients who have STEMI from the National
Registry of Myocardial Infarction-4
[NRMI-4],5a we estimate 500 000 STEMI
events per year in the U.S. This writing committee strongly
endorses several public health campaigns that are likely to
contribute to a reduction in the incidence of and fatality from
STEMI in the future and additional research of new strategies
for the management of STEMI patients in the
community.613
 |
III. Management Before STEMI |
A. Identification of Patients at Risk of STEMI
Class I
-
Primary care providers should evaluate the presence and status of
control of major risk factors for coronary heart disease (CHD)
for all patients at regular intervals (approximately every 3 to
5 years). (Level of Evidence: C)
-
Ten-year risk (National Cholesterol Education Program [NCEP]
global risk) of developing symptomatic CHD should be
calculated for all patients who have 2 or more major
risk factors to assess the need for primary prevention
strategies.14 (Level of
Evidence: B)
-
Patients with established CHD should be identified for
secondary prevention, and patients with a CHD risk
equivalent (eg, diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney disease,
or 10-year risk greater than 20% as calculated by
Framingham equations) should receive equally intensive
risk factor intervention as those with clinically apparent
CHD. (Level of Evidence: A)
B. Patient Education for Early Recognition and Response to
STEMI
Class I
-
1. Patients with symptoms of STEMI (chest discomfort with or
without radiation to the arms[s], back, neck, jaw, or epigastrium;
shortness of breath; weakness; diaphoresis; nausea; lightheadedness)
should be transported to the hospital by ambulance rather than
by friends or relatives. (Level of Evidence: B)
-
2. Healthcare providers should actively address the
following issues regarding STEMI with patients and
their families:
-
a. The patients heart attack risk
(Level of Evidence: C)
-
b. How to recognize symptoms of STEMI (Level
of Evidence: C)
-
c. The advisability of calling 9-1-1 if
symptoms are unimproved or worsening after 5 minutes,
despite feelings of uncertainty about the symptoms and
fear of potential embarrassment (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
d. A plan for appropriate recognition and
response to a potential acute cardiac event that includes
the phone number to access emergency medical services
(EMS), generally
9-1-1.15 (Level
of Evidence: C)
-
3. Healthcare providers should instruct patients for whom
nitroglycerin has been prescribed previously to take ONE
nitroglycerin dose sublingually in response to chest
discomfort/pain. If chest discomfort/pain is unimproved
or worsening 5 minutes after 1 sublingual nitroglycerin
dose has been taken, it is recommended that the patient
or family member/friend call 9-1-1 immediately to access
EMS. (Level of Evidence: C)
Morbidity and mortality due to STEMI can be reduced significantly if
patients and bystanders recognize symptoms early, activate the
EMS system, and thereby shorten the time to definitive treatment.
Patients with possible symptoms of STEMI should be transported
to the hospital by ambulance rather than by friends or relatives
because there is a significant association between arrival at
the emergency department (ED) by ambulance and early reperfusion
therapy.1619 Although the traditional
recommendation is for patients to take 1 nitroglycerin dose
sublingually, 5 minutes apart, for up to 3 doses before calling
for emergency evaluation, this recommendation has been modified
by the writing committee to encourage earlier contacting of EMS
by patients with symptoms suggestive of
STEMI.20,21
 |
IV. Onset of STEMI |
A. Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest
Class I
-
All communities should create and maintain a strong "Chain of
Survival" for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest that includes early
access (recognition of the problem and activation of the EMS
system by a bystander), early cardiopulmonary resuscitation
(CPR), early defibrillation for patients who need it, and early
advanced cardiac life support (ACLS). (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
Family members of patients experiencing STEMI should be advised
to take CPR training and familiarize themselves with the use
of an automated external defibrillator (AED). In addition, they
should be referred to a CPR training program that has a social
support component for family members of post-STEMI patients.
(Level of Evidence: B)
The links in the chain include early access (recognition of the
problem and activation of the EMS system by a bystander), early
CPR, early defibrillation for patients who need it, and early
ACLS.
 |
V. Prehospital Issues |
A. Emergency Medical Services Systems
Class I
-
All EMS first responders who respond to patients with chest pain
and/or suspected cardiac arrest should be trained and equipped to
provide early defibrillation. (Level of Evidence: A)
-
All public safety first responders who respond to patients
with chest pain and/or suspected cardiac arrest should be
trained and equipped to provide early defibrillation with AEDs.
(Provision of early defibrillation with AEDs by nonpublic safety
first responders is a promising new strategy, but further study
is needed to determine its safety and efficacy.) (Level of
Evidence: B)
-
Dispatchers staffing 9-1-1 center emergency medical calls
should have medical training, should use nationally
developed and maintained protocols, and should have
a quality-improvement system in place to ensure compliance
with protocols. (Level of Evidence: C)
Early access to EMS is promoted by a 9-1-1 system currently
available to more than 90% of the US population. To minimize
time to treatment, particularly for cardiopulmonary arrest,
many communities allow volunteer and/or paid firefighters and
other first-aid providers to function as first responders, providing
CPR and, increasingly, early defibrillation using automated
external defibrillators (AEDs) until emergency medical technicians
and paramedics arrive. Most cities and larger suburban areas
provide EMS ambulance services with providers from the fire
department, a private ambulance company, and/or volunteers.
B. Prehospital Chest Pain Evaluation and Treatment
Class I
-
Prehospital EMS providers should administer 162 to 325 mg of
aspirin (chewed) to chest pain patients suspected of having
STEMI unless contraindicated or already taken by patient. Although
some trials have used enteric-coated aspirin for initial dosing,
more rapid buccal absorption occurs with nonenteric-coated
formulations. (Level of Evidence: C)
Class IIa
-
It is reasonable for all 9-1-1 dispatchers to advise patients
without a history of aspirin allergy who have symptoms of STEMI
to chew aspirin (162 to 325 mg) while awaiting arrival of
prehospital EMS providers. Although some trials have used
enteric-coated aspirin for initial dosing, more rapid buccal
absorption occurs with nonenteric-coated formulations.
(Level of Evidence: C)
-
It is reasonable that all ACLS providers perform and evaluate
12-lead electrocardiograms (ECGs) routinely on chest pain patients
suspected of STEMI. (Level of Evidence: B)
-
If the ECG shows evidence of STEMI, it is reasonable that
prehospital ACLS providers review a reperfusion "checklist"
and relay the ECG and checklist findings to a predetermined
medical control facility and/or receiving hospital.
(Level of Evidence: C)
It is reasonable for physicians to encourage the prehospital
administration of aspirin via EMS personnel (ie, EMS dispatchers
and providers) in patients with symptoms suggestive of STEMI
unless its use is
contraindicated.22 For patients who
have ECG evidence of STEMI, it is reasonable that paramedics review
a reperfusion checklist and relay the ECG and checklist
findings to a predetermined medical control facility and/or
receiving hospital.
C. Prehospital Fibrinolysis
Class IIa
-
Establishment of a prehospital fibrinolysis protocol is reasonable
in 1) settings in which physicians are present in the ambulance
or in 2) well-organized EMS systems with full-time paramedics
who have 12-lead ECGs in the field with transmission capability,
paramedic initial and ongoing training in ECG interpretation
and STEMI treatment, online medical command, a medical director
with training/experience in STEMI management, and an ongoing
continuous quality-improvement program. (Level of Evidence:
B)
Randomized controlled trials of fibrinolytic therapy have demonstrated
the benefit of initiating fibrinolytic therapy as early as possible
after onset of ischemic-type chest discomfort (Figure
1).2325 It appears reasonable to expect that if
fibrinolytic therapy could be started at the time of prehospital
evaluation, a greater number of lives could be saved. Prehospital
fibrinolysis is reasonable in those settings in which physicians
are present in the ambulance or prehospital transport times are
more than 60 minutes in high-volume (more than 25,000 runs per
year) EMS systems.26 Other
considerations for implementing a prehospital fibrinolytic service
include the ability to transmit ECGs, paramedic initial and ongoing
training in ECG interpretation and myocardial infarction (MI)
treatment, online medical command, a medical director with
training/experience in management of STEMI, and full-time
paramedics.27

View larger version (31K):
[in
this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 1. Options for transportation
of STEMI patients and initial reperfusion treatment. Panel A, Patient
transported by EMS after calling 9-1-1: Reperfusion in patients with
STEMI can be accomplished by the pharmacological (fibrinolysis) or catheter-based
(primary PCI) approaches. Implementation of these strategies varies based
on the mode of transportation of the patient and capabilities at the receiving
hospital. Transport time to the hospital is variable from case to case, but
the goal is to keep total ischemic time within 120 minutes. There are 3
possibilities: (1) If EMS has fibrinolytic capability and the patient qualifies
for therapy, prehospital fibrinolysis should be started within 30 minutes
of EMS arrival on scene. (2) If EMS is not capable of administering prehospital
fibrinolysis and the patient is transported to a nonPCI-capable hospital,
the hospital door-to-needle time should be within 30 minutes for patients
in whom fibrinolysis is indicated. (3) If EMS is not capable of administering
prehospital fibrinolysis and the patient is transported to a PCI-capable
hospital, the hospital door-to-balloon time should be within 90 minutes.
Interhospital transfer: It is also appropriate to consider emergency
interhospital transfer of the patient to a PCI-capable hospital for mechanical
revascularization if (1) there is a contraindication to fibrinolysis; (2)
PCI can be initiated promptly (within 90 minutes after the patient presented
to the initial receiving hospital or within 60 minutes compared to when
fibrinolysis with a fibrin-specific agent could be initiated at the initial
receiving hospital); or (3) fibrinolysis is administered and is unsuccessful
(ie, "rescue PCI"). Secondary nonemergency interhospital transfer can be
considered for recurrent ischemia. Patient self-transport: Patient
self-transportation is discouraged. If the patient arrives at a
nonPCI-capable hospital, the door-to-needle time should be within 30
minutes. If the patient arrives at a PCI-capable hospital, the door-to-balloon
time should be within 90 minutes. The treatment options and time recommendations
after first hospital arrival are the same. Panel B, For patients who receive
fibrinolysis, noninvasive risk stratification is recommended to identify
the need for rescue PCI (failed fibrinolysis) or ischemia-driven PCI. See
Sections
6.3.1.6.4.5. and
6.3.1.6.7. in the full-text guidelines. Regardless of the initial
method of reperfusion treatment, all patients should receive late hospital
care and secondary prevention of STEMI. EMS indicates Emergency Medical System;
PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention; CABG, coronary artery bypass graft
surgery; Hosp, hospital; Noninv., Noninvasive. * Golden hour = First 60
minutes; The
medical system goal is to facilitate rapid recognition and treatment of patients
with STEMI such that door-to-needle (or medical contactto-needle) time
for initiation of fibrinolytic therapy is within 30 minutes or that
door-to-balloon (or medical contactto-balloon) time for PCI is within
90 minutes. These goals should not be understood as ideal times but rather
as the longest times that should be considered acceptable for a given system.
Systems that are able to achieve even more rapid times for treatment of patients
with STEMI should be encouraged. Modified with permission from Armstrong
et al. Circulation.
2003;107:25337.25
|
|
D. Prehospital Destination Protocols
Class I
-
Patients with STEMI who have cardiogenic shock and are less than
75 years of age should be brought immediately or secondarily
transferred to facilities capable of cardiac catheterization
and rapid revascularization (percutaneous coronary intervention
[PCI] or coronary artery bypass graft surgery [CABG]) if it
can be performed within 18 hours of onset of shock. (Level of
Evidence: A)
-
Patients with STEMI who have contraindications to
fibrinolytic therapy should be brought immediately or
secondarily transferred promptly (ie, primary-receiving
hospital door-to-departure time less than 30 minutes)
to facilities capable of cardiac catheterization and
rapid revascularization (PCI or CABG). (Level of Evidence:
B)
-
Every community should have a written protocol that guides
EMS system personnel in determining where to take
patients with suspected or confirmed STEMI. (Level of
Evidence: C)
Class IIa
-
It is reasonable that patients with STEMI who have cardiogenic
shock and are 75 years of age or older be considered for immediate
or prompt secondary transfer to facilities capable of cardiac
catheterization and rapid revascularization (PCI or CABG) if
it can be performed within 18 hours of onset of shock. (Level
of Evidence: B)
-
It is reasonable that patients with STEMI who are at
especially high risk of dying, including those with
severe congestive heart failure (CHF), be considered for
immediate or prompt secondary transfer (ie,
primary-receiving hospital door-to-departure time less
than 30 minutes) to facilities capable of cardiac
catheterization and rapid revascularization (PCI or
CABG). (Level of Evidence: B)
Every community should have a written protocol that guides EMS
system personnel in determining where to take patients with
suspected or confirmed STEMI. Active involvement of local healthcare
providers, particularly cardiologists and emergency physicians,
is needed to formulate local EMS destination protocols for these
patients. In general, patients with suspected STEMI should be
taken to the nearest appropriate hospital. However, patients
with STEMI and shock are an exception to this general rule.
Whenever possible, STEMI patients less than 75 years of age
with shock should be transferred to facilities capable of cardiac
catheterization and rapid revascularization (PCI or CABG). On
the basis of observations in the SHOCK Trial Registry and other
registries, it is reasonable to extend such considerations of
transfer to invasive centers for elderly patients with shock
(see VII.F.5 and Section 7.6.5 of the full-text guidelines).
Patients with STEMI who have contraindications to fibrinolytic
therapy should be brought immediately or secondarily transferred
promptly (ie, primary-receiving hospital door-to-departure time
less than 30 minutes) to facilities capable of cardiac
catheterization and rapid revascularization (PCI or CABG).
 |
VI. Initial Recognition and Management in the Emergency Department |
A. Optimal Strategies for Emergency Department Triage
Class I
-
Hospitals should establish multidisciplinary teams (including
primary care physicians, emergency medicine physicians,
cardiologists, nurses, and laboratorians) to develop guideline-based,
institution-specific written protocols for triaging and managing
patients who are seen in the prehospital setting or present to
the ED with symptoms suggestive of STEMI. (Level of Evidence:
B)
B. Initial Patient Evaluation
Class I
-
The delay from patient contact with the healthcare system (typically,
arrival at the ED or contact with paramedics) to initiation of
fibrinolytic therapy should be less than 30 minutes. Alternatively,
if PCI is chosen, the delay from patient contact with the healthcare
system (typically, arrival at the ED or contact with paramedics)
to balloon inflation should be less than 90 minutes. (Level
of Evidence: B)
-
The choice of initial STEMI treatment should be made by the
emergency medicine physician on duty based on a
predetermined, institution-specific, written protocol that
is a collaborative effort of cardiologists (both those
involved in coronary care unit management and
interventionalists), emergency physicians, primary
care physicians, nurses, and other appropriate personnel.
For cases in which the initial diagnosis and treatment
plan is unclear to the emergency physician or is not
covered directly by the agreed-on protocol, immediate
cardiology consultation is advisable. (Level of Evidence:
C)
Regardless of the approach used, all patients presenting to the
ED with chest discomfort or other symptoms suggestive of STEMI
or unstable angina should be considered high-priority triage cases
and should be evaluated and treated based on a predetermined,
institution-specific chest pain protocol. The goal for patients
with STEMI should be to achieve a door-to-needle time within 30
minutes and a door-to-balloon time within 90 minutes
(Figure
1).25
1. History
Class I
-
The targeted history of STEMI patients taken in the ED should
ascertain whether the patient has had prior episodes of myocardial
ischemia such as stable or unstable angina, MI, CABG, or PCI.
Evaluation of the patients complaints should focus on
chest discomfort, associated symptoms, sex- and age-related
differences in presentation, hypertension, diabetes mellitus,
possibility of aortic dissection, risk of bleeding, and clinical
cerebrovascular disease (amaurosis fugax, face/limb weakness
or clumsiness, face/limb numbness or sensory loss, ataxia, or
vertigo). (Level of Evidence: C)
2. Physical Examination
Class I
-
A physical examination should be performed to aid in the diagnosis
and assessment of the extent, location, and presence of
complications of STEMI. (Level of Evidence: C)
-
A brief, focused, and limited neurological examination to
look for evidence of prior stroke or cognitive deficits
should be performed on STEMI patients before administration
of fibrinolytic therapy. (Level of Evidence:
C)
A brief physical examination may promote rapid triage, whereas a
more detailed physical examination aids in the differential
diagnosis and is useful for assessing the extent, location,
and presence of complications of STEMI.
3. Electrocardiogram
Class I
-
A 12-lead ECG should be performed and shown to an experienced
emergency physician within 10 minutes of ED arrival for all
patients with chest discomfort (or anginal equivalent) or other
symptoms suggestive of STEMI. (Level of Evidence: C)
-
If the initial ECG is not diagnostic of STEMI but the
patient remains symptomatic, and there is a high clinical
suspicion for STEMI, serial ECGs at 5- to 10-minute
intervals or continuous 12-lead ST-segment monitoring
should be performed to detect the potential development
of ST elevation. (Level of Evidence: C)
-
In patients with inferior STEMI, right-sided ECG leads
should be obtained to screen for ST elevation suggestive
of right ventricular (RV) infarction. (See Section
7.6.6 of the full-text guidelines and the ACC/AHA/ASE
2003 Guideline Update for the Clinical Application of
Echocardiography.) (Level of Evidence: B)
The 12-lead ECG in the ED is at the center of the therapeutic
decision pathway because of the strong evidence that ST-segment
elevation identifies patients who benefit from reperfusion
therapy.28
4. Laboratory Examinations
Class I
-
Laboratory examinations should be performed as part of the management
of STEMI patients but should not delay the implementation of
reperfusion therapy. (Level of Evidence: C)
In addition to serum cardiac biomarkers for cardiac damage, several
routine evaluations have important implications for management
of patients with STEMI. Although these studies should be ordered
when the patient is first seen, therapeutic decisions should not
be delayed until results are obtained because of the crucial role
of time to therapy in STEMI.
5. Biomarkers of Cardiac Damage
Class I
-
Cardiac-specific troponins should be used as the optimum biomarkers
for the evaluation of patients with STEMI who have coexistent
skeletal muscle injury. (Level of Evidence: C)
-
For patients with ST elevation on the 12-lead ECG and
symptoms of STEMI, reperfusion therapy should be initiated
as soon as possible and is not contingent on a biomarker
assay. (Level of Evidence: C)
Class IIa
-
Serial biomarker measurements can be useful to provide supportive
noninvasive evidence of reperfusion of the infarct artery after
fibrinolytic therapy in patients not undergoing angiography
within the first 24 hours after fibrinolytic therapy. (Level
of Evidence: B)
Class III
-
Serial biomarker measurements should not be relied on to diagnose
reinfarction within the first 18 hours after the onset of STEMI.
(Level of Evidence: C)
For patients with ST-segment elevation, the diagnosis of STEMI is
secure; initiation of reperfusion therapy should not be delayed to
wait for the results of a cardiac biomarker
assay.29 Quantitative analysis
of cardiac biomarker measurements provides prognostic information
and a noninvasive assessment of the likelihood that the patient
has undergone successful reperfusion when fibrinolytic therapy
is administered.
a. Bedside Testing for Serum Cardiac Biomarkers
Class I
-
Although handheld bedside (point-of-care) assays may be used for
a qualitative assessment of the presence of an elevated level
of a serum cardiac biomarker, subsequent measurements of cardiac
biomarker levels should be performed with a quantitative test.
(Level of Evidence: B)
-
For patients with ST elevation on the 12-lead ECG and
symptoms of STEMI, reperfusion therapy should be initiated
as soon as possible and is not contingent on a bedside
biomarker assay. (Level of Evidence: C)
A positive bedside test should be confirmed by a conventional
quantitative test. However, reperfusion therapy should not be
delayed to wait for the results of a quantitative assay.
6. Imaging
Class I
-
Patients with STEMI should have a portable chest X-ray, but this
should not delay implementation of reperfusion therapy (unless
a potential contraindication, such as aortic dissection, is
suspected). (Level of Evidence: C)
-
Imaging studies such as a high-quality portable chest X-ray,
transthoracic and/or transesophageal echocardiography, and
a contrast chest computed tomographic scan or a MRI
scan should be used to differentiate STEMI from aortic
dissection in patients for whom this distinction is
initially unclear. (Level of Evidence: B)
Class IIa
-
Portable echocardiography is reasonable to clarify the diagnosis
of STEMI and allow risk stratification of patients with chest
pain on arrival at the ED, especially if the diagnosis of STEMI
is confounded by left bundle-branch block (LBBB) or pacing, or
there is suspicion of posterior STEMI with anterior ST depressions.
(See Section 7.6.7 Mechanical Causes of Heart Failure/Low Output
Syndrome of the full-text guidelines.) (Level of Evidence:
B)
Class III
-
Single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) radionuclide
imaging should not be performed to diagnose STEMI in patients
for whom the diagnosis of STEMI is evident on the ECG. (Level
of Evidence: B)
C. Management
1. Routine
Measures
a. Oxygen
Class I
-
Supplemental oxygen should be administered to patients with
arterial oxygen desaturation (SaO2 less than 90%). (Level
of Evidence: B)
Class IIa
-
It is reasonable to administer supplemental oxygen to all patients
with uncomplicated STEMI during the first 6 hours. (Level of
Evidence: C)
b. Nitroglycerin
Class I
-
Patients with ongoing ischemic discomfort should receive sublingual
nitroglycerin (0.4 mg) every 5 minutes for a total of 3 doses,
after which an assessment should be made about the need for
intravenous nitroglycerin. (Level of Evidence: C)
-
Intravenous nitroglycerin is indicated for relief of ongoing
ischemic discomfort, control of hypertension, or
management of pulmonary congestion. (Level of Evidence:
C)
Class III
-
Nitrates should not be administered to patients with systolic
blood pressure less than 90 mm Hg or greater than or equal to
30 mm Hg below baseline, severe bradycardia (less than 50 bpm),
tachycardia (more than 100 bpm), or suspected RV infarction.
(Level of Evidence: C)
-
Nitrates should not be administered to patients who have
received a phosphodiesterase inhibitor for erectile
dysfunction within the last 24 hours (48 hours for
tadalafil). (Level of Evidence: B)
Nitroglycerin may be administered to relieve ischemic pain and is
clearly indicated as a vasodilator in patients with STEMI associated
with left ventricular (LV) failure. Nitrates in all forms should
be avoided in patients with initial systolic blood pressures less
than 90 mm Hg or greater than or equal to 30 mm Hg below baseline,
in patients with marked bradycardia or
tachycardia,30 and in patients
with known or suspected RV infarction. In view of their marginal
treatment benefits, nitrates should not be used if hypotension
limits the administration of beta-blockers, which have more powerful
salutary effects.
c. Analgesia
Class I
-
Morphine sulfate (2 to 4 mg IV with increments of 2 to 8 mg IV
repeated at 5- to 15-minute intervals) is the analgesic of choice
for management of pain associated with STEMI. (Level of Evidence:
C)
d. Aspirin
Class I
-
Aspirin should be chewed by patients who have not taken aspirin
before presentation with STEMI. The initial dose should be 162
mg (Level of Evidence: A) to 325 mg (Level of Evidence:
C). Although some trials have used enteric-coated aspirin
for initial dosing, more rapid buccal absorption occurs with
nonenteric-coated aspirin formulations.
In a dose of 162 mg or more, aspirin produces a rapid clinical
antithrombotic effect caused by immediate and near-total inhibition
of thromboxane A2 production. Aspirin now forms part of the
early management of all patients with suspected STEMI and should
be given promptly, and certainly within the first 24 hours, at
a dose between 162 and 325 mg and continued indefinitely at a
daily dose of 75 to 162 mg.31 Although
some trials have used enteric-coated aspirin for initial dosing,
more rapid buccal absorption occurs with nonenteric-coated
formulations.32
e. Beta-Blockers
Class I
-
Oral beta-blocker therapy should be administered promptly to
those patients without a contraindication, irrespective of
concomitant fibrinolytic therapy or performance of primary PCI.
(Level of Evidence: A)
Class IIa
-
It is reasonable to administer IV beta-blockers promptly to STEMI
patients without contraindications, especially if a tachyarrhythmia
or hypertension is present. (Level of Evidence: B)
Immediate beta-blocker therapy appears to reduce the magnitude of
infarction and incidence of associated complications in subjects not
receiving concomitant fibrinolytic therapy, the rate of reinfarction
in patients receiving fibrinolytic therapy, and the frequency
of life-threatening ventricular tachyarrhythmias.
f. Reperfusion
GENERAL
CONCEPTS.
Class I
-
All STEMI patients should undergo rapid evaluation for reperfusion
therapy and have a reperfusion strategy implemented promptly
after contact with the medical system. (Level of Evidence:
A)
Evidence exists that expeditious restoration of flow in the
obstructed infarct artery after the onset of symptoms in STEMI
patients is a key determinant of short- and long-term outcomes
regardless of whether reperfusion is accomplished by fibrinolysis
or
PCI.3335 As discussed previously (also see Section
4.1 of the full-text guidelines), efforts should be made to
shorten the time from recognition of symptoms by the patient
to contact with the medical system. All healthcare providers
caring for STEMI patients from the point of entry into the medical
system must recognize the need for rapid triage and implementation
of care in a fashion analogous to the handling of trauma patients.
When considering recommendations for timely reperfusion of STEMI
patients, the Writing Committee reviewed data from clinical
trials, focusing particular attention on enrollment criteria
for selection of patients for randomization, actual times reported
in the trial report rather than simply the allowable window
specified in the trial protocol, treatment effect of the reperfusion
strategy on individual components of a composite primary end
point (eg, mortality, recurrent nonfatal infarction), ancillary
therapies (eg, antithrombin and antiplatelet agents), and the
interface between fibrinolysis and referral for angiography
and revascularization. When available, data from registries
were also reviewed to assess the generalizability of observations
from clinical trials of reperfusion to routine practice. Despite
the wealth of reports on reperfusion for STEMI, it is not possible
to produce a simple algorithm, given the heterogeneity of patient
profiles and availability of resources in various clinical settings
at various times of day. This section introduces the recommendations
for an aggressive attempt to minimize the time from entry into
the medical system to implementation of a reperfusion strategy
using the concept of medical system goals. More detailed discussion
of these goals and the issues to be considered in selecting
the type of reperfusion therapy are discussed in the Selection
of Reperfusion Therapy section of VI.C.1.f (Section
6.3.1.6.2 of the full-text guidelines), followed
by a discussion of available resources.
The medical system goal is to facilitate rapid recognition and
treatment of patients with STEMI such that door-to-needle (or
medical contactto-needle) time for initiation of fibrinolytic
therapy can be achieved within 30 minutes or that door-to-balloon
(or medical contactto-balloon) time for PCI can be kept
under 90 minutes. These goals may not be relevant for the patients
with an appropriate reason for delay, such as uncertainty about
the diagnosis (particularly for the use of fibrinolytic therapy),
need for the evaluation and treatment of other life-threatening
conditions (eg, respiratory failure), or delays associated with
the patients informed choice to have more time to consider
the decision. In the absence of such types of circumstances,
the emphasis is on having a system in place such that when a
patient with STEMI presents for medical care, reperfusion therapy
is able to be provided as soon as possible within these time
periods. Because there is not considered to be a threshold effect
for the benefit of shorter times to reperfusion, these goals
should not be understood as "ideal" times but the longest times
that should be considered acceptable. Systems that are able to
achieve even more rapid times for patients should be encouraged.
Also, this goal should not be perceived as an average performance
standard but a goal of an early treatment system that every
hospital should seek for every appropriate patient.
SELECTION
OF REPERFUSION
STRATEGY.
Several issues should be considered in selecting the type of
reperfusion therapy:
-
Time From Onset of Symptoms. Time from onset of symptoms to
fibrinolytic therapy is an important predictor of MI size and
patient outcome.36 The efficacy
of fibrinolytic agents in lysing thrombus diminishes with the
passage of time.37 Fibrinolytic
therapy administered within the first 2 hours (especially the
first hour) can occasionally abort MI and dramatically reduce
mortality.23,38
In contrast, the ability to produce a patent
infarct artery is much less dependent on symptom duration
in patients undergoing PCI. Several reports claim no
influence of time delay on mortality rates when PCI is
performed after 2 to 3 hours of symptom
duration.39,40
Importantly, after adjustment for baseline characteristics,
time from symptom onset to balloon inflation is
significantly correlated with 1-year mortality in patients
undergoing primary PCI for
STEMI.41 The Task Force
on the Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction of the
European Society of
Cardiology42 and this Committee both
recommend a target of medical contactto-balloon or
door-to-balloon time within 90 minutes.
-
Risk of STEMI. Several models have been developed that
assist clinicians in estimating the risk of mortality
in patients with
STEMI.4347
Although these models vary somewhat in the factors
loaded into the risk-prediction tool and also vary with
respect to statistical measures of their discriminative
power (eg, C statistic), all the models provide
clinicians with a means to assess the continuum of risk
from STEMI. When the estimated mortality with fibrinolysis
is extremely high, as is the case in patients with
cardiogenic shock, compelling evidence exists that
favors a PCI strategy.
-
Risk of Bleeding. Choice of reperfusion therapy is also
affected by the patients risk of bleeding. When
both types of reperfusion are available, the higher
the patients risk of bleeding with fibrinolytic
therapy, the more strongly the decision should favor PCI.
If PCI is unavailable, then the benefit of pharmacological
reperfusion therapy should be balanced against the
risk.
-
Time Required for Transport to a Skilled PCI Laboratory.
The availability of interventional cardiology facilities
is a key determinant of whether PCI can be provided.
For facilities that can offer PCI, the literature suggests
that this approach is superior to pharmacological
reperfusion.48 The trials comparing
pharmacological and PCI strategies, however, were
conducted before the advent of more recent pharmacological
and PCI strategies. When a composite end point of death,
nonfatal recurrent MI, or stroke is analyzed, much
of the superiority of a PCI strategy is driven by a reduction
in the rate of nonfatal recurrent MI (Figure
2).36 The rate of nonfatal
recurrent MI can be influenced both by the adjunctive
therapy used and by the proportion of patients who are
referred for PCI when the initial attempt at fibrinolysis
fails or myocardial ischemia recurs after initially
successful pharmacological reperfusion.

View larger version (33K):
[in
this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 2. PCI vs
fibrinolysis for STEMI. Short-term (4 to 6 weeks; top left) and long-term
(top right) outcomes for various end points shown are plotted for STEMI patients
randomized to PCI or fibrinolysis for reperfusion in 23 trials (n=7739).
Given the frequency of events for each end point in the 2 treatment groups,
the number needed to treat (NNT) or number needed to harm (NNH) is shown
for the short-term (bottom left) and long-term (bottom right) outcomes. The
magnitude of treatment differences for death, nonfatal reinfarction, and
stroke varies depending on whether PCI is compared with streptokinase or
a fibrin-specific lytic. For example, when primary PCI is compared with alteplase
and the SHOCK trial is excluded, the mortality rate is 5.5% vs 6.7% (odds
ratio 0.81, 95% confidence interval 0.64 to 1.03,
P=0.081).76a See references
76 and
76a for additional discussion. Modified
with permission from Elsevier (Keeley et al. The Lancet.
2003;361:1320)76 ReMI indicates
recurrent MI; Rec. Isch, recurrent ischemia; Hem. Stroke, hemorrhagic stroke;
and CVA, cerebrovascular accident.
|
|
The experience and location of the PCI laboratory also plays a
role in the choice of therapy. Not all laboratories can provide
prompt, high-quality primary PCI. Even centers with interventional
cardiology facilities may not be able to provide the staffing
required for 24-hour coverage of the catheterization laboratory.
Despite staffing availability, the volume of cases in the laboratory
may be insufficient for the team to acquire and maintain skills
required for rapid PCI reperfusion strategies.
A decision must be made when a STEMI patient presents to a center
without interventional cardiology facilities. Fibrinolytic therapy
can generally be provided sooner than primary PCI. As the time
delay for performing PCI increases, the mortality benefit associated
with expeditiously performed primary PCI over fibrinolysis
decreases.49 Compared with
a fibrin-specific lytic agent, a PCI strategy may not reduce mortality
when a delay greater than 60 minutes is anticipated versus immediate
administration of a lytic.
Given the current literature, it is not possible to say definitively
that a particular reperfusion approach is superior for all patients,
in all clinical settings, at all times of day (Danchin N; oral
presentation at American Heart Association Scientific Sessions
2003, Orlando, FL, November
2003).5052 The main point is that some type of
reperfusion therapy should be selected for all appropriate patients
with suspected STEMI. The appropriate and timely use of some
reperfusion therapy is likely more important than the choice of
therapy, given the current literature and the expanding array
of options. Clinical circumstances in which fibrinolytic therapy
is generally preferred or an invasive strategy is generally preferred
are shown in Figure 3.
Available Resources
Class I
-
STEMI patients presenting to a facility without the capability
for expert, prompt intervention with primary PCI within 90 minutes
of first medical contact should undergo fibrinolysis unless
contraindicated. (Level of Evidence: A)
PHARMACOLOGICAL
REPERFUSION.
Indications for Fibrinolytic Therapy
Class I
-
In the absence of contraindications, fibrinolytic therapy should
be administered to STEMI patients with symptom onset within
the prior 12 hours and ST elevation greater than 0.1 mV in at
least 2 contiguous precordial leads or at least 2 adjacent limb
leads. (Level of Evidence: A)
-
In the absence of contraindications, fibrinolytic therapy
should be administered to STEMI patients with symptom
onset within the prior 12 hours and new or presumably new
LBBB. (Level of Evidence: A)
Class IIa
-
In the absence of contraindications, it is reasonable to administer
fibrinolytic therapy to STEMI patients with symptom onset within
the prior 12 hours and 12-lead ECG findings consistent with a
true posterior MI. (Level of Evidence: C)
-
In the absence of contraindications, it is reasonable to
administer fibrinolytic therapy to patients with symptoms
of STEMI beginning within the prior 12 to 24 hours
who have continuing ischemic symptoms and ST elevation
greater than 0.1 mV in at least 2 contiguous precordial
leads or at least 2 adjacent limb leads. (Level of
Evidence: B)
Class III
-
Fibrinolytic therapy should not be administered to asymptomatic
patients whose initial symptoms of STEMI began more than 24
hours earlier. (Level of Evidence: C)
-
Fibrinolytic therapy should not be administered to patients
whose 12-lead ECG shows only ST-segment depression except
if a true posterior MI is suspected. (Level of Evidence:
A)
Because the benefit of fibrinolytic therapy is directly related to
the time from symptom onset, treatment benefit is maximized by
the earliest possible application of therapy. The constellation of
clinical features that must be present (although not necessarily at
the same time) to serve as an indication for fibrinolysis includes
symptoms of myocardial ischemia and ST elevation greater than
0.1 mV, in at least 2 contiguous leads, or new or presumably new
LBBB on the presenting
ECG.23,54
Contraindications/Cautions
Class I
-
Healthcare providers should ascertain whether the patient has
neurological contraindications to fibrinolytic therapy, including
any history of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), significant closed
head or facial trauma within the past 3 months, uncontrolled
hypertension, or ischemic stroke within the past 3 months.
(See Table 2 for a comprehensive list.)
(Level of Evidence: A)
-
STEMI patients at substantial (greater than or equal to 4%)
risk of ICH should be treated with PCI rather than with
fibrinolytic therapy. (See Figure 3 for
further management considerations.) (Level of Evidence:
A)
A detailed list of contraindications and cautions for the use of
fibrinolytic therapy is shown in Table 2.
Complications of Fibrinolytic Therapy: Neurological
and Other
Class I
-
The occurrence of a change in neurological status during or after
reperfusion therapy, particularly within the first 24 hours after
initiation of treatment, is considered to be due to ICH until
proven otherwise. Fibrinolytic, antiplatelet, and anticoagulant
therapies should be discontinued until brain imaging scan shows
no evidence of ICH. (Level of Evidence: A)
-
Neurology and/or neurosurgery or hematology consultations
should be obtained for STEMI patients who have ICH
as dictated by clinical circumstances. (Level of
Evidence: C)
-
In patients with ICH, infusions of cryoprecipitate, fresh
frozen plasma, protamine, and platelets should be given,
as dictated by clinical circumstances. (Level of
Evidence: C)
Class IIa
-
1. In patients with ICH, it is reasonable to:
-
a. Optimize blood pressure and blood
glucose levels. (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
b. Reduce intracranial pressure with an
infusion of mannitol, endotracheal intubation, and
hyperventilation. (Level of Evidence: C)
-
c. Consider neurosurgical evacuation of
ICH. (Level of Evidence: C)
Combination Therapy With Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa
Inhibitors
Class IIb
-
Combination pharmacological reperfusion with abciximab and half-dose
reteplase or tenecteplase may be considered for prevention of
reinfarction (Level of Evidence: A) and other complications
of STEMI in selected patients: anterior location of MI, age
less than 75 years, and no risk factors for bleeding. In two
clinical trials of combination reperfusion, the prevention of
reinfarction did not translate into a survival benefit at either
30 days or 1 year.54a
(Level of Evidence: B)
-
Combination pharmacological reperfusion with abciximab and
half-dose reteplase or tenecteplase may be considered
for prevention of reinfarction and other complications of
STEMI in selected patients (anterior location of MI, age
less than 75 years, and no risk factors for bleeding) in
whom an early referral for angiography and PCI (ie,
facilitated PCI) is planned. (Level of Evidence:
C)
Class III
-
Combination pharmacological reperfusion with abciximab and half-dose
reteplase or tenecteplase should not be given to patients aged
greater than 75 years because of an increased risk of ICH.
(Level of Evidence: B)
PERCUTANEOUS
CORONARY
INTERVENTION
Coronary Angiography
Class I
-
1. Diagnostic coronary angiography should be performed:
-
a. In candidates for primary or rescue
PCI. (Level of Evidence: A)
-
b. In patients with cardiogenic shock
who are candidates for revascularization. (Level of
Evidence: A)
-
c. In candidates for surgical repair of
ventricular septal rupture or severe mitral regurgitation
(MR). (Level of Evidence: B)
-
d. In patients with persistent hemodynamic
and/or electrical instability. (Level of Evidence:
C)
Class III
-
Coronary angiography should not be performed in patients with
extensive comorbidities in whom the risks of revascularization
are likely to outweigh the benefits. (Level of Evidence:
C)
Primary PCI
Class I
-
1. General considerations: If immediately available, primary PCI
should be performed in patients with STEMI (including true posterior
MI) or MI with new or presumably new LBBB who can undergo PCI
of the infarct artery within 12 hours of symptom onset, if performed
in a timely fashion (balloon inflation within 90 minutes of
presentation) by persons skilled in the procedure (individuals
who perform more than 75 PCI procedures per year). The procedure
should be supported by experienced personnel in an appropriate
laboratory environment (performs more than 200 PCI procedures
per year, of which at least 36 are primary PCI for STEMI, and
has cardiac surgery capability). (Level of Evidence:
A)
-
2. Specific considerations:
-
a. Primary PCI should be performed as
quickly as possible, with a goal of a medical
contactto-balloon or door-to-balloon time of
within 90 minutes. (Level of Evidence: B)
-
b. If the symptom duration is within 3
hours and the expected door-to-balloon time minus the
expected door-to-needle time is:
-
i) within 1 hour,
primary PCI is generally preferred. (Level of
Evidence: B)
-
ii) greater than 1 hour,
fibrinolytic therapy (fibrin-specific agents) is generally
preferred. (Level of Evidence: B)
-
c. If symptom duration is greater than 3
hours, primary PCI is generally preferred and should
be performed with a medical contactto-balloon or
door-to-balloon time as brief as possible, with a goal of
within 90 minutes. (Level of Evidence: B)
-
d. Primary PCI should be performed for
patients younger than 75 years old with ST elevation
or LBBB who develop shock within 36 hours of MI and
are suitable for revascularization that can be performed
within 18 hours of shock, unless further support is
futile because of the patients wishes or
contraindications/unsuitability for further invasive care. (Level
of Evidence: A)
-
e. Primary PCI should be performed in
patients with severe CHF and/or pulmonary edema (Killip
class 3) and onset of symptoms within 12 hours. The
medical contactto-balloon or door-to-balloon time
should be as short as possible (ie, goal within 90 min).
(Level of Evidence: B)
Class IIa
-
1. Primary PCI is reasonable for selected patients 75 years or
older with ST elevation or LBBB or who develop shock within 36
hours of MI and are suitable for revascularization that can be
performed within 18 hours of shock. Patients with good prior
functional status who are suitable for revascularization and
agree to invasive care may be selected for such an invasive
strategy. (Level of Evidence: B)
-
2. It is reasonable to perform primary PCI for patients with
onset of symptoms within the prior 12 to 24 hours and 1
or more of the following:
-
a. Severe CHF (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
b. Hemodynamic or electrical instability
(Level of Evidence: C)
-
c. Persistent ischemic symptoms. (Level
of Evidence: C)
Class IIb
-
The benefit of primary PCI for STEMI patients eligible for fibrinolysis
is not well established when performed by an operator who performs
fewer than 75 PCI procedures per year. (Level of Evidence:
C)
Class III
-
PCI should not be performed in a noninfarct artery at the time of
primary PCI in patients without hemodynamic compromise. (Level of
Evidence: C)
-
Primary PCI should not be performed in asymptomatic
patients more than 12 hours after onset of STEMI if they
are hemodynamically and electrically stable. (Level
of Evidence: C)
Primary PCI has been compared with fibrinolytic therapy in 22
randomized clinical
trials.50,52,5574 An additional trial,
SHOCK (SHould we emergently revascularize Occluded Coronaries
for cardiogenic shocK?),75 that
compared medical stabilization with immediate revascularization
for cardiogenic shock was included along with the above 22 trials
in an overview of primary PCI versus
fibrinolysis.76 These investigations
demonstrate that PCI-treated patients experience lower short-term
mortality rates, less nonfatal reinfarction, and less hemorrhagic
stroke than those treated by fibrinolysis but have an increased
risk for major
bleeding.76 These results have been
achieved in medical centers with experienced providers and under
circumstances in which PCI can be performed promptly after patient
presentation (Figure
2).76
Additional considerations that affect the magnitude of the difference
between PCI- and fibrinolysis-treated patients include the fact
that unfractionated heparin (UFH) was used as the antithrombin
with fibrinolytics (as opposed to other antithrombins such as
enoxaparin [see Ancillary Therapy in Section VI.C.1.f and also
Section
6.3.1.6.8.1.1 of the full-text guidelines] or bivalirudin
[see Section
6.3.1.6.8.1.2 of the full-text guidelines] that are
associated with a reduction in the rate of recurrent MI after
fibrinolysis), a smaller but still statistically significant
advantage for PCI compared with a fibrin-specific lytic versus
streptokinase, and variation among the PCI arms as to whether
a stent was implanted or glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa antagonists
were administered. Figure 2 shows the short- and
long-term outcomes of patients with STEMI treated by fibrinolysis
versus PCI and the number of patients who need to be treated to
prevent 1 event or cause 1 harmful complication when selecting
PCI instead of fibrinolysis as the reperfusion strategy
(Figure 2).76 Of
note, when primary PCI is compared with tissue plasminogen
activator (tPA) and the SHOCK trial is excluded, the mortality
rate is 5.5% versus 6.7% (odds ratio 0.81%, 95% confidence
interval [CI] 0.64 to 1.03, P equals
0.081.76a
There is serious and legitimate concern that a routine policy of
primary PCI for patients with STEMI will result in unacceptable
delays in achieving reperfusion in a substantial number of cases
and produce less than optimal outcomes if performed by
less-experienced operators. The mean time delay for PCI instead
of fibrinolysis in the randomized studies was approximately 40
minutes.76 Strict performance
criteria must be mandated for primary PCI programs so that long
door-to-balloon times and performance by low-volume or poor-outcome
operators/laboratories do not occur. Interventional cardiologists
and centers should strive for outcomes to include (1) medical
contactto-balloon or door-to-balloon times less than 90
minutes; (2) TIMI (Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction) 2/3
flow rates obtained in more than 90% of patients; (3) emergency CABG
rate less than 2% among all patients undergoing the procedure; (4)
actual performance of PCI in a high percentage of patients (85%)
brought to the laboratory; and (5) risk-adjusted in-hospital
mortality rate less than 7% in patients without cardiogenic
shock. This would result in a risk-adjusted mortality rate with
PCI comparable to that reported for fibrinolytic therapy in
fibrinolytic-eligible
patients76 and would be consistent
with previously reported registry
experience.7780 Otherwise, the
focus of treatment should be the early use of fibrinolytic therapy
(Figure
2).76
PCI appears to have its greatest mortality benefit in high-risk
patients. In patients with cardiogenic shock, an absolute 9%
reduction in 30-day mortality with coronary revascularization
instead of immediate medical stabilization was reported in the
SHOCK trial.75
Time from symptom onset to reperfusion is an important predictor of
patient outcome. Two
studies81,82
have reported increasing mortality rates with increasing
door-to-balloon times. Other studies have shown smaller infarct
size, better LV function, and fewer complications when reperfusion
occurs before
PCI.8385 An analysis of the randomized controlled
trials comparing fibrinolysis with a fibrin-specific agent versus
primary PCI suggests that the mortality benefit with PCI exists
when treatment is delayed by no more than 60 minutes. Mortality
increases significantly with each 15-minute delay in the time
between arrival and restoration of TIMI-3 flow (door-toTIMI-3
flow time), which further underscores the importance of timely
reperfusion in patients who undergo primary
PCI.86 Importantly, after adjustment
for baseline characteristics, time from symptom onset to
balloon inflation is significantly correlated with 1-year
mortality in patients undergoing primary PCI for STEMI (relative
risk equals 1.08 for each 30-minute delay from symptom onset to
balloon inflation; P equals
0.04).35,41
Given that the medical contactto-needle time goal within
30 minutes, this Writing Committee joins the Task Force on the
Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction of the European Society
of Cardiology in lowering the medical contactto-balloon
or door-to-balloon time goal from within 120 minutes to within
90 minutes in an attempt to maximize the benefits for reperfusion
by PCI.42
If the expected door-to-balloon time exceeds the expected door-to-needle
time by more than 60 minutes, fibrinolytic treatment with a
fibrin-specific agent should be considered unless it is
contraindicated. This is particularly important when symptom duration
is less than 3 hours but is less important with longer symptom
duration, when less ischemic myocardium can be salvaged.
PRIMARY PCI
IN
FIBRINOLYTIC-INELIGIBLE
PATIENTS
Class I
-
Primary PCI should be performed in fibrinolytic-ineligible patients
who present with STEMI within 12 hours of symptom onset. (Level
of Evidence: C)
Class IIa
-
1. It is reasonable to perform primary PCI for fibrinolytic-ineligible
patients with onset of symptoms within the prior 12 to 24 hours
and 1 or more of the following:
-
a. Severe CHF (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
b. Hemodynamic or electrical instability
(Level of Evidence: C)
-
c. Persistent ischemic symptoms. (Level
of Evidence: C)
Randomized controlled trials evaluating the outcome of PCI for
patients who present with STEMI but who are ineligible for
fibrinolytic therapy have not been performed. Few data are available
to characterize the value of primary PCI for this subset of STEMI
patients; however, the recommendations in Section IV.A (and Section
4.2 of the full-text guidelines) are applicable to these
patients. Nevertheless, these patients are at increased risk for
mortality,87 and there is
a general consensus that PCI is an appropriate means for achieving
reperfusion in those who cannot receive fibrinolytics because
of increased risk of
bleeding.8891
PRIMARY PCI
WITHOUT
ON-SITE
CARDIAC
SURGERY
Class IIb
-
Primary PCI might be considered in hospitals without on-site
cardiac surgery, provided that there exists a proven plan for
rapid transport to a cardiac surgery operating room in a nearby
hospital with appropriate hemodynamic support capability for
transfer. The procedure should be limited to patients with STEMI
or MI with new, or presumably new, LBBB on ECG, and should be
done in a timely fashion (balloon inflation within 90 minutes
of presentation) by persons skilled in the procedure (at least
75 PCIs per year) and at hospitals that perform a minimum of
36 primary PCI procedures per year. (Level of Evidence:
B)
Class III
-
Primary PCI should not be performed in hospitals without on-site
cardiac surgery and without a proven plan for rapid transport
to a cardiac surgery operating room in a nearby hospital or
without appropriate hemodynamic support capability for transfer.
(Level of Evidence: C)
From clinical data and expert consensus, the Committee recommends
that primary PCI for acute STEMI performed at hospitals without
established elective PCI programs should be restricted to those
institutions capable of performing a requisite minimum number
of primary PCI procedures (36 per year) with a proven plan for
rapid and effective PCI and rapid access to cardiac surgery in
a nearby hospital. The benefit of primary PCI is not well
established for operators who perform fewer than 75 PCIs per
year or in a hospital that performs fewer than 36 primary PCI
procedures per year. In addition, the benefit of timely reperfusion
of the infarct artery by primary PCI at sites without on-site
surgery must be weighed against the small but finite risk of
harm to the patient related to the time required to transfer
the patient to a site with CABG surgery
capabilities.92,93
INTERHOSPITAL
TRANSFER
FOR PRIMARY
PCI
To achieve optimal results, time from the first hospital door to
the balloon inflation in the second hospital should be as short
as possible, with a goal of within 90 minutes. Significant
reductions in door-to-balloon times might be achieved by directly
transporting patients to PCI centers rather than transporting
them to the nearest hospital, if interhospital transfer will
subsequently be required to obtain primary PCI.
Primary Stenting
Primary stenting has been compared with primary angioplasty in
9
studies.94103 There were no differences
in mortality (3.0% versus 2.8%) or reinfarction (1.8% versus 2.1%)
rates. However, major adverse cardiac events were reduced, driven
by the reduction in subsequent target-vessel revascularization
with stenting.
Preliminary reports suggest that compared with conventional bare
metal stents, drug-eluting stents are not associated with increased
risk when used for primary PCI in STEMI
patients.104
Postprocedure vessel patency, biomarker release, and the incidence
of short-term adverse events were similar in patients receiving
sirolimus (n equals 186) or bare metal (n equals 183) stents.
Thirty-day event rates of death, reinfarction, or revascularization
were 7.5% versus 10.4%, respectively (P equals
0.4).104
Facilitated PCI
Class IIb
-
Facilitated PCI might be performed as a reperfusion strategy in
higher-risk patients when PCI is not immediately available and
bleeding risk is low. (Level of Evidence: B)
Facilitated PCI refers to a strategy of planned immediate PCI after
an initial pharmacological regimen such as full-dose fibrinolysis,
half-dose fibrinolysis, a GP IIb/IIIa inhibitor, or a combination
of reduced-dose fibrinolytic therapy and a platelet GP IIb/IIIa
inhibitor. A strategy of facilitated PCI holds promise in
higher-risk patients when PCI is not immediately available. Potential
risks include increased bleeding complications, especially in
patients who are at least 75 years of age (see Pharmacological
Reperfusion in Section VI.C.1.f and Section
6.3.1.6.3.8. of the full-text guidelines), and potential
limitations include added cost. Several randomized trials of
facilitated PCI with a variety of pharmacological regimens are
in progress.
Rescue PCI
Class I
-
Rescue PCI should be performed in patients less than 75 years old
with ST elevation or LBBB who develop shock within 36 hours of
MI and are suitable for revascularization that can be performed
within 18 hours of shock, unless further support is futile because
of the patients wishes or contraindications/unsuitability
for further invasive care. (Level of Evidence: B)
-
Rescue PCI should be performed in patients with severe CHF
and/or pulmonary edema (Killip class 3) and onset of
symptoms within 12 hours. (Level of Evidence:
B)
Class IIa
-
1. Rescue PCI is reasonable for selected patients 75 years or
older with ST elevation or LBBB or who develop shock within 36
hours of MI and are suitable for revascularization that can be
performed within 18 hours of shock. Patients with good prior
functional status who are suitable for revascularization and
agree to invasive care may be selected for such an invasive
strategy. (Level of Evidence: B)
-
2. It is reasonable to perform rescue PCI for patients with
1 or more of the following:
-
a. Hemodynamic or electrical instability
(Level of Evidence: C)
-
b. Persistent ischemic symptoms. (Level
of Evidence: C)
Rescue PCI refers to PCI within 12 hours after failed fibrinolysis
for patients with continuing or recurrent myocardial ischemia.
A major problem in adopting a strategy of rescue PCI lies in the
limitation of accurate identification of patients for whom
fibrinolytic therapy has not restored antegrade coronary flow.
In a prior era in which the practice of PCI was less mature,
immediate catheterization of all patients after fibrinolytic
therapy to identify those with an occluded infarct artery was
found to be impractical, costly, and often associated with bleeding
complications.105,106
This strategy is being reevaluated in clinical trials testing
facilitated PCI in the contemporary PCI setting.
There are no convincing data to support the routine use of late
adjuvant PCI days after failed fibrinolysis or for patients
who do not receive reperfusion therapy. Nevertheless, this is
being done in some STEMI patients as an extension of the invasive
strategy for non-STEMI patients. The Occluded Artery Trial (OAT)
is currently randomizing patients to test whether routine PCI
days to weeks after MI improves long-term clinical outcomes in
asymptomatic high-risk patients with an occluded infarct
artery.107
PCI for Cardiogenic Shock
Class I
-
Primary PCI is recommended for patients less than 75 years old
with ST elevation or LBBB who develop shock within 36 hours of
MI and are suitable for revascularization that can be performed
within 18 hours of shock, unless further support is futile because
of the patients wishes or contraindications/unsuitability
for further invasive care. (Level of Evidence: A)
Class IIa
-
Primary PCI is reasonable for selected patients aged 75 years or
older with ST elevation or LBBB who develop shock within 36 hours
of MI and who are suitable for revascularization that can be performed
within 18 hours of shock. Patients with good prior functional
status who are suitable for revascularization and agree to invasive
care may be selected for such an invasive strategy. (Level
of Evidence: B)
Observational studies support the value of PCI for patients who
develop cardiogenic shock in the early hours of STEMI. In the
SHOCK trial,75 the survival curves continued
to progressively diverge such that at 6 months and 1 year, there
was a significant mortality reduction with emergency revascularization
(53% versus 66%, P less than
0.03).108 The prespecified subgroup
analysis of patients less than 75 years old showed an absolute
15% reduction in 30-day mortality (P less than 0.02), whereas
there was no apparent benefit for the small cohort (n equals 56)
of patients more than 75 years old. These data strongly support
the approach that patients younger than 75 years with STEMI
complicated by cardiogenic shock should undergo emergency
revascularization and support measures. Three
registries109111 have demonstrated a marked survival benefit
for elderly patients who are clinically selected for revascularization
(approximately 1 of 5 patients), so age alone should not disqualify
a patient from early revascularization. (See Section VII.F.5 and
also Section 7.6.5 of the full-text guidelines.)
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention After
Fibrinolysis
Class I
-
In patients whose anatomy is suitable, PCI should be performed
when there is objective evidence of recurrent MI. (Level of
Evidence: C)
-
In patients whose anatomy is suitable, PCI should be
performed for moderate or severe spontaneous or provocable
myocardial ischemia during recovery from STEMI. (Level
of Evidence: B)
-
In patients whose anatomy is suitable, PCI should be performed
for cardiogenic shock or hemodynamic instability. (See section
on PCI for Cardiogenic Shock in Section VI.C.1.f.) (Level of
Evidence: B)
Class IIa
-
It is reasonable to perform routine PCI in patients with LV
ejection fraction (LVEF) less than or equal to 0.40, CHF, or
serious ventricular arrhythmias. (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
It is reasonable to perform PCI when there is documented
clinical heart failure during the acute episode, even though
subsequent evaluation shows preserved LV function (LVEF greater
than 0.40). (Level of Evidence: C)
Class IIb
-
Routine PCI might be considered as part of an invasive strategy
after fibrinolytic therapy. (Level of Evidence: B)
Immediately After Successful Fibrinolysis. Randomized prospective
trials examined the efficacy and safety of immediate PCI after
fibrinolysis.105,106,112 These trials showed no benefit of routine
PCI of the stenotic infarct artery immediately after fibrinolytic
therapy. The strategy did not appear to salvage myocardium,
improve LVEF, or prevent reinfarction or death. Those subjected
to this approach appeared to have an increased incidence of
adverse events, including bleeding, recurrent ischemia, emergency
CABG, and death. These studies have not been repeated in the
modern interventional era with improved equipment, improved
antiplatelet and anticoagulant strategies, and coronary stents,
thus leaving the question of routine PCI early after successful
fibrinolysis unresolved in contemporary practice. Studies of
facilitated PCI are enrolling
patients.113116
Hours to Days After Successful Fibrinolysis. Great improvements
in equipment, operator experience, and adjunctive pharmacotherapy
have increased PCI success rates and decreased complications.
More recently, the invasive strategy for NSTEMI patients has
been given a Class I recommendation by the ACC/AHA Guidelines
for the Management of Patients With Unstable
Angina/Non-STEMI.117 STEMI
patients are increasingly being treated similarly as an extension
of this approach. Although 6 published
reports115,118121,123 and 1 preliminary
report122 support this strategy,
randomized studies similar to those in NSTEMI need to be
performed.
ACUTE
SURGICAL
REPERFUSION
Class I
-
1. Emergency or urgent CABG in patients with STEMI should be
undertaken in the following circumstances:
-
a. Failed PCI with persistent pain or
hemodynamic instability in patients with coronary anatomy
suitable for surgery. (Level of Evidence:
B)
-
b. Persistent or recurrent ischemia
refractory to medical therapy in patients who have
coronary anatomy suitable for surgery, have a significant
area of myocardium at risk, and are not candidates
for PCI or fibrinolytic therapy. (Level of Evidence:
B)
-
c. At the time of surgical repair of
postinfarction ventricular septal rupture (VSR) or
mitral valve insufficiency. (Level of Evidence:
B)
-
d. Cardiogenic shock in patients less
than 75 years old with ST elevation, LBBB, or posterior
MI who develop shock within 36 hours of STEMI, have
severe multivessel or left main disease, and are suitable
for revascularization that can be performed within
18 hours of shock, unless further support is futile
because of the patients wishes or contraindications/unsuitability
for further invasive care. (Level of Evidence: A)
-
e. Life-threatening ventricular
arrhythmias in the presence of greater than or equal
to 50% left main stenosis and/or triple-vessel disease.
(Level of Evidence: B)
Class IIa
-
Emergency CABG can be useful as the primary reperfusion strategy
in patients who have suitable anatomy, who are not candidates
for fibrinolysis or PCI, and who are in the early hours (6 to
12 hours) of an evolving STEMI, especially if severe multivessel
or left main disease is present. (Level of Evidence:
B)
-
Emergency CABG can be effective in selected patients 75
years or older with ST elevation, LBBB, or posterior
MI who develop shock within 36 hours of STEMI, have
severe triple-vessel or left main disease, and are
suitable for revascularization that can be performed
within 18 hours of shock. Patients with good prior
functional status who are suitable for revascularization
and agree to invasive care may be selected for such an
invasive strategy. (Level of Evidence:
B)
Class III
-
Emergency CABG should not be performed in patients with persistent
angina and a small area of risk if they are hemodynamically
stable. (Level of Evidence: C)
-
Emergency CABG should not be performed in patients with
successful epicardial reperfusion but unsuccessful
microvascular reperfusion. (Level of Evidence:
C)
PATIENTS
WITH STEMI NOT
RECEIVING
REPERFUSION
Guideline-based recommendations for nonreperfusion treatments should
not vary whether or not patients received reperfusion therapy.
The major difference is that patients not receiving reperfusion
therapy are considered to have a higher risk for future adverse
events.124
ASSESSMENT
OF
REPERFUSION
Class IIa
-
It is reasonable to monitor the pattern of ST elevation, cardiac
rhythm, and clinical symptoms over the 60 to 180 minutes after
initiation of fibrinolytic therapy. Noninvasive findings suggestive
of reperfusion include relief of symptoms, maintenance or
restoration of hemodynamic and or electrical stability, and a
reduction of at least 50% of the initial ST-segment elevation
injury pattern on a follow-up ECG 60 to 90 minutes after initiation
of therapy. (Level of Evidence: B)
Persistence of unrelenting ischemic chest pain, absence of resolution
of the qualifying ST-segment elevation, and hemodynamic and/or
electrical instability are generally indicators of failed
pharmacological reperfusion and the need to consider rescue PCI.
Aggressive medical support may be necessary in the interim. (See
Rescue PCI in Section in VI.C.I.f.)
ANCILLARY
THERAPY
Antithrombins as Ancillary Therapy to Reperfusion
Therapy
UNFRACTIONATED
HEPARIN
AS
ANCILLARY
THERAPY
TO
REPERFUSION
THERAPY
Class I
-
Patients undergoing percutaneous or surgical revascularization
should be given UFH. (Level of Evidence: C)
-
UFH should be given intravenously to patients undergoing
reperfusion therapy with alteplase, reteplase, or
tenecteplase, with dosing as follows: bolus of 60 U/kg
(maximum 4000 U) followed by an initial infusion of
12 U/kg per hour (maximum 1000 U/hr) adjusted to maintain
activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) at 1.5 to 2.0
times control (approximately 50 to 70 seconds). (Level
of Evidence: C)
-
UFH should be given intravenously to patients treated with
nonselective fibrinolytic agents (streptokinase,
anistreplase, or urokinase) who are at high risk for
systemic emboli (large or anterior MI, atrial fibrillation,
previous embolus, or known LV thrombus). (Level
of Evidence: B)
-
Platelet counts should be monitored daily in patients given
UFH. (Level of Evidence: C)
Class IIb
-
It may be reasonable to administer UFH intravenously to patients
undergoing reperfusion therapy with streptokinase. (Level of
Evidence: B)
Because of the evidence that the measured effect of UFH on the aPTT
is important for patient outcome and that the predominant variable
mediating the effect of a given dose of heparin is
weight,125 it is important to
administer the initial doses of UFH as a weight-adjusted
bolus.126 For fibrin-specific
(alteplase, reteplase, and tenecteplase) fibrinolytic-treated
patients, a 60 U/kg bolus followed by a maintenance infusion of
12 U/kg per hour (with a maximum of 4000 U bolus and 1000 U/h
initial infusion for patients weighing greater than 70 kg) is
recommended. The recommended weight-adjusted dose of UFH, when
it is administered without fibrinolytics, is 60 to 70 U/kg IV
bolus and 12 to 15 U/kg per hour
infusion.117
LOW-MOLECULAR-WEIGHT HEPARIN
AS
ANCILLARY
THERAPY
TO
REPERFUSION
THERAPY
Class IIb
-
LMWH might be considered an acceptable alternative to UFH as
ancillary therapy for patients less than 75 years of age who
are receiving fibrinolytic therapy, provided that significant
renal dysfunction (serum creatinine greater than 2.5 mg/dL in
men or 2.0 mg/dL in women) is not present. Enoxaparin (30 mg
IV bolus followed by 1.0 mg/kg subcutaneous injection every 12
hours until hospital discharge) used in combination with full-dose
tenecteplase is the most comprehensively studied regimen in patients
less than 75 years of age. (Level of Evidence: B)
Class III
-
LMWH should not be used as an alternative to UFH as ancillary
therapy in patients over 75 years of age who are receiving
fibrinolytic therapy. (Level of Evidence: B)
-
LMWH should not be used as an alternative to UFH as
ancillary therapy in patients less than 75 years of
age who are receiving fibrinolytic therapy but have
significant renal dysfunction (serum creatinine greater
than 2.5 mg/dL in men or 2.0 mg/dL in women). (Level
of Evidence: B)
The available data suggest that the rate of early (60 to 90 minutes)
reperfusion of the infarct artery, either assessed angiographically
or by noninvasive means, is not enhanced by administration of
an LMWH. However, a generally consistent theme of a lower rate
of reocclusion of the infarct artery, reinfarction, or recurrent
ischemic events emerges in patients receiving LMWH regardless
of whether the control group was given placebo or UFH.
DIRECT
ANTITHROMBINS
AS
ANCILLARY
THERAPY
TO
REPERFUSION
THERAPY
Class IIa
-
In patients with known heparin-induced thrombocytopenia, it is
reasonable to consider bivalirudin as a useful alternative to
heparin to be used in conjunction with streptokinase. Dosing
according to the HERO (Hirulog and Early Reperfusion or Occlusion)-2
regimen (a bolus of 0.25 mg/kg followed by an intravenous infusion
of 0.5 mg/kg per hour for the first 12 hours and 0.25 mg/kg
per hour for the subsequent 36
hours)127 is recommended but
with a reduction in the infusion rate if the PTT is above 75
seconds within the first 12 hours. (Level of Evidence:
B)
On the basis of the data in the HERO-2 trial, the Writing Committee
believed that bivalirudin could be considered an acceptable
alternative to UFH in those STEMI patients who receive fibrinolysis
with streptokinase, have heparin-induced thrombocytopenia, and
who, in the opinion of the treating physician, would benefit
from anticoagulation.
Antiplatelets
ASPIRIN
Class I
-
A daily dose of aspirin (initial dose of 162 to 325 mg orally;
maintenance dose of 75 to 162 mg) should be given indefinitely
after STEMI to all patients without a true aspirin allergy.
(Level of Evidence: A)
As discussed, aspirin should be given to the patient with suspected
STEMI as early as possible and should be continued indefinitely,
regardless of the strategy for reperfusion and regardless of
whether additional antiplatelet agents are administered. True
aspirin allergy is the only exception to this recommendation.
THIENOPYRIDINES
Class I
-
In patients who have undergone diagnostic cardiac catheterization
and for whom PCI is planned, clopidogrel should be started and
continued for at least 1 month after bare metal stent implantation,
for several months after drug-eluting stent implantation (3
months for sirolimus, 6 months for paclitaxel), and for up to
12 months in patients who are not at high risk for bleeding.
(Level of Evidence: B)
-
In patients taking clopidogrel in whom CABG is planned, the
drug should be withheld for at least 5 days, and
preferably for 7, unless the urgency for revascularization
outweighs the risks of excess bleeding. (Level of
Evidence: B)
Class IIa
-
Clopidogrel is probably indicated in patients receiving fibrinolytic
therapy who are unable to take aspirin because of hypersensitivity
or major gastrointestinal intolerance. (Level of Evidence:
C)
Clopidogrel combined with aspirin is recommended for STEMI patients
who undergo coronary stent
implantation.128132
There are no safety data available regarding the combination of
fibrinolytic agents and clopidogrel, but ongoing trials will provide
this information in the future. However, in patients in whom
aspirin is contraindicated because of aspirin sensitivity,
clopidogrel is probably useful as a substitute for aspirin to
reduce the risk of
occlusion.133 There are no safety data
comparing 300 and 600 mg as loading doses for clopidogrel. We
do not recommend routine administration of clopidogrel as pretreatment
in patients who have not yet undergone diagnostic cardiac
catheterization and in whom CABG surgery would be performed within
5 to 7 days if
warranted.134
GLYCOPROTEIN
IIb/IIIa INHIBITORS
Class IIa
-
It is reasonable to start treatment with abciximab as early as
possible before primary PCI (with or without stenting) in patients
with STEMI. (Level of Evidence: B)
Class IIb
-
Treatment with tirofiban or eptifibatide may be considered before
primary PCI (with or without stenting) in patients with STEMI.
(Level of Evidence: C)
The Writing Committee believes that it is reasonable to start
treatment with abciximab as early as possible in patients undergoing
primary PCI (with or without stenting) but, given the size and
limitations of the available data set, assigned a Class IIa
recommendation to this treatment. The data on tirofiban and
eptifibatide in primary PCI are far more limited than for abciximab.
However, given the common mode of action of the agents, a modest
amount of angiographic
data,135 and general clinical
experience to date, tirofiban or eptifibatide may be useful as
antiplatelet therapy to support primary PCI for STEMI (with or
without stenting) (Class IIb recommendation).
OTHER
PHARMACOLOGICAL
MEASURES
Inhibition of Renin-Angiotensin- Aldosterone
System
Class I
-
An angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor should be administered
orally within the first 24 hours of STEMI to patients with anterior
infarction, pulmonary congestion, or LVEF less than 0.40, in
the absence of hypotension (systolic blood pressure less than
100 mm Hg or less than 30 mm Hg below baseline) or known
contraindications to that Class of medications. (Level of Evidence:
A)
-
An angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) should be administered
to STEMI patients who are intolerant of ACE inhibitors and
who have either clinical or radiological signs of heart
failure or LVEF less than 0.40. Valsartan and candesartan
have established efficacy for this recommendation.
(Level of Evidence: C)
Class IIa
-
An ACE inhibitor administered orally within the first 24 hours of
STEMI can be useful in patients without anterior infarction,
pulmonary congestion, or LVEF less than 0.40 in the absence of
hypotension (systolic blood pressure less than 100 mm Hg or less
than 30 mm Hg below baseline) or known contraindications to that
class of medications. The expected treatment benefit in such patients
is less (5 lives saved per 1000 patients treated) than for patients
with LV dysfunction. (Level of Evidence: B)
Class III
-
An intravenous ACE inhibitor should not be given to patients
within the first 24 hours of STEMI because of the risk of
hypotension. (A possible exception may be patients with refractory
hypertension.) (Level of Evidence: B)
A number of large, randomized clinical trials have assessed the
role of ACE inhibitors early in the course of acute MI. All trials
with oral ACE inhibitors have shown benefit from their early use,
including those in which early entry criteria included clinical
suspicion of acute infarctions. Data from these trials indicate
that ACE inhibitors should generally be started within the first
24 hours, ideally after fibrinolytic therapy has been completed
and blood pressure has stabilized. ACE inhibitors should not be
used if systolic blood pressure is less than 100 mm Hg or less
than 30 mm Hg below baseline, if clinically relevant renal failure
is present, if there is a history of bilateral stenosis of the
renal arteries, or if there is known allergy to ACE inhibitors.
The use of ARBs has not been explored as thoroughly as ACE inhibitors
in STEMI patients. However, clinical experience in the management
of patients with heart failure and data from clinical trials
in STEMI patients (see Sections 7.4.3 and 7.6.4 of the full-text
guidelines) suggest that ARBs may be useful in patients with
depressed LV function or clinical heart failure but who are
intolerant of an ACE inhibitor. Use of aldosterone antagonists
in STEMI patients is discussed in Sections 7.4.3 and 7.6.4 of
the full-text guidelines.
Metabolic Modulation of the Glucose-Insulin
Axis
STRICT
GLUCOSE
CONTROL
DURING
STEMI
Class I
-
An insulin infusion to normalize blood glucose is recommended for
patients with STEMI and complicated courses. (Level of Evidence:
B)
Class IIa
-
During the acute phase (first 24 to 48 hours) of the management
of STEMI in patients with hyperglycemia, it is reasonable to
administer an insulin infusion to normalize blood glucose, even
in patients with an uncomplicated course. (Level of Evidence:
B)
-
After the acute phase of STEMI, it is reasonable to individualize
treatment of diabetics, selecting from a combination of insulin,
insulin analogs, and oral hypoglycemic agents that achieve the
best glycemic control and are well tolerated. (Level of Evidence:
C)
Compelling evidence for tight glucose control in patients in the
intensive care unit (a large proportion of whom were there after
cardiac surgery) supports the importance of intensive insulin
therapy to achieve a normal blood glucose level in critically ill
patients.136,136a
Magnesium
Class IIa
-
It is reasonable that documented magnesium deficits be corrected,
especially in patients receiving diuretics before the onset of
STEMI. (Level of Evidence: C)
-
It is reasonable that episodes of torsade de pointes-type
ventricular tachycardia (VT) associated with a prolonged
QT interval be treated with 1 to 2 g of magnesium
administered as an intravenous bolus over 5 minutes.
(Level of Evidence: C)
Class III
-
In the absence of documented electrolyte deficits or torsade de
pointes-type VT, routine intravenous magnesium should not be
administered to STEMI patients at any level of risk. (Level of
Evidence: A)
Calcium Channel Blockers
Class IIa
-
It is reasonable to give verapamil or diltiazem to patients in
whom beta-blockers are ineffective or contraindicated (eg,
bronchospastic disease) for relief of ongoing ischemia or control
of a rapid ventricular response with atrial fibrillation or
flutter after STEMI in the absence of CHF, LV dysfunction, or
atrioventricular (AV) block. (Level of Evidence: C)
Class III
-
Diltiazem and verapamil are contraindicated in patients with
STEMI and associated systolic LV dysfunction and CHF. (Level
of Evidence: A)
-
Nifedipine (immediate-release form) is contraindicated in
treatment of STEMI because of the reflex sympathetic
activation, tachycardia, and hypotension associated
with its use. (Level of Evidence:
B)
See the full-text guidelines for further explanation.
 |
VII. Hospital Management |
A. Location
1. Coronary Care
Unit
Class I
-
STEMI patients should be admitted to a quiet and comfortable
environment that provides for continuous monitoring of the ECG
and pulse oximetry and has ready access to facilities for
hemodynamic monitoring and defibrillation. (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
The patients medication regimen should be reviewed to
confirm the administration of aspirin and beta-blockers
in an adequate dose to control heart rate and to assess
the need for intravenous nitroglycerin for control
of angina, hypertension, or heart failure. (Level
of Evidence: A)
-
The ongoing need for supplemental oxygen should be assessed
by monitoring arterial oxygen saturation. When stable for
6 hours, the patient should be reassessed for oxygen
need (ie, O2 saturation of less than 90%), and
discontinuation of supplemental oxygen should be
considered. (Level of Evidence: C)
-
Nursing care should be provided by individuals certified
in critical care, with staffing based on the specific
needs of patients and provider competencies, as well
as organizational priorities. (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
Care of STEMI patients in the critical care unit (CCU)
should be structured around protocols derived from
practice guidelines. (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
Electrocardiographic monitoring leads should be based on
the location and rhythm to optimize detection of ST
deviation, axis shift, conduction defects, and
dysrhythmias. (Level of Evidence:
B)
Class III
-
It is not an effective use of the CCU environment to admit terminally
ill, "do not resuscitate" patients with STEMI, because clinical
and comfort needs can be provided outside of a critical care
environment. (Level of Evidence: C)
2. Stepdown
Unit
Class I
-
It is a useful triage strategy to admit low-risk STEMI patients
who have undergone successful PCI directly to the stepdown unit
for post-PCI care rather than to the CCU. (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
2. STEMI patients originally admitted to the CCU who demonstrate
12 to 24 hours of clinical stability (absence of recurrent ischemia,
heart failure, or hemodynamically compromising dysrhythmias)
should be transferred to the stepdown unit. (Level of Evidence:
C)
Class IIa
-
It is reasonable for patients recovering from STEMI who have
clinically symptomatic heart failure to be managed on the stepdown
unit, provided that facilities for continuous monitoring of
pulse oximetry and appropriately skilled nurses are available.
(Level of Evidence: C)
-
It is reasonable for patients recovering from STEMI who have
arrhythmias that are hemodynamically well-tolerated (eg,
atrial fibrillation with a controlled ventricular response;
paroxysms of nonsustained VT lasting less than 30 seconds)
to be managed on the stepdown unit, provided that
facilities for continuous monitoring of the ECG,
defibrillators, and appropriately skilled nurses are
available. (Level of Evidence: C)
Class IIb
-
Patients recovering from STEMI who have clinically significant
pulmonary disease requiring high-flow supplemental oxygen or
noninvasive mask ventilation/bilevel positive airway pressure
(BIPAP)/continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) may be considered
for care on a stepdown unit provided that facilities for continuous
monitoring of pulse oximetry and appropriately skilled nurses
with a sufficient nurse:patient ratio are available. (Level
of Evidence: C)
B. Early, General Measures
1. Level of
Activity
Class IIa
-
After 12 to 24 hours, it is reasonable to allow patients with
hemodynamic instability or continued ischemia to have bedside
commode privileges. (Level of Evidence: C)
Class III
-
Patients with STEMI who are free of recurrent ischemic discomfort,
symptoms of heart failure, or serious disturbances of heart
rhythm should not be on bed rest for more than 12 to 24 hours.
(Level of Evidence: C)
2. Diet
Class I
-
Patients with STEMI should be prescribed the NCEP Adult Treatment
Panel III (ATP III) Therapeutic Lifestyle Changes (TLC) diet,
which focuses on reduced intake of fats and cholesterol, less
than 7% of total calories as saturated fats, less than 200 mg
of cholesterol per day, increased consumption of omega-3 fatty
acids, and appropriate caloric intake for energy needs. (Level
of Evidence: C)
-
Diabetic patients with STEMI should have an appropriate food
group balance and caloric intake. (Level of Evidence:
B)
-
Sodium intake should be restricted in STEMI patients with
hypertension or heart failure. (Level of Evidence:
B)
STEMI patients should receive a reduced saturated fat and cholesterol
diet per the ATP III TLC
approach.137 (See VII.L.2 and
Section 7.12.2 of the full-text guidelines.)
3. Patient Education in the Hospital
Setting
Class I
-
Patient counseling to maximize adherence to evidence-based post-STEMI
treatments (eg, compliance with taking medication, exercise
prescription, and smoking cessation) should begin during the
early phase of hospitalization, occur intensively at discharge,
and continue at follow-up visits with providers and through
cardiac rehabilitation programs and community support groups,
as appropriate. (Level of Evidence: C)
-
Critical pathways and protocols and other
quality-improvement tools (eg, the ACC "Guidelines
Applied in Practice" and the AHAs "Get with the
Guidelines") should be used to improve the application
of evidence-based treatments by patients with STEMI,
caregivers, and institutions. (Level of Evidence:
C)
Patient education should be viewed as a continuous process that
should to be part of every patient encounter (ie, on hospital
arrival, inpatient admission, discharge, and at follow-up visits).
4.
Analgesia/Anxiolytics
Class IIa
-
It is reasonable to use anxiolytic medications in STEMI patients
to alleviate short-term anxiety or altered behavior related to
hospitalization for STEMI. (Level of Evidence: C)
-
It is reasonable to routinely assess the patients
anxiety level and manage it with behavioral interventions
and referral for counseling. (Level of Evidence:
C)
Anxiety and depression are prevalent in patients hospitalized for
STEMI because patients are confronted with a diagnosis that is
major, both psychologically and
physically.138,139
Anxiety has been demonstrated to predict in-hospital recurrent
ischemia and
arrhythmias140 and cardiac events during
the first year after an
MI.141
C. Risk Stratification During Early Hospital Course
Risk stratification is a continuous process and requires the
updating of initial assessments with data obtained during the
hospital stay. Indicators of failed reperfusion (eg, recurrence
of chest pain and persistence of ECG findings indicating infarction)
identify a patient who should undergo coronary angiography.
Similarly, findings consistent with mechanical complications
(eg, sudden onset of heart failure or presence of a new murmur)
herald increased risk and suggest the need for rapid intervention.
For patients who did not undergo primary reperfusion, changes
in clinical status (eg, development of shock) may herald a worsening
clinical status and are an indication for coronary angiography.
Patients with a low risk of complications may be candidates
for early discharge. The lowest-risk patients are those who
did not have STEMI despite the initial suspicions. Clinicians
should strive to identify such patients within 8 to 12 hours
of onset of symptoms. Serial sampling of serum cardiac biomarkers
and use of 12-lead ECGs and their interpretation in the context
of the number of hours that have elapsed since onset of the
patients symptoms can determine the presence of STEMI
better than adherence to a rigid protocol that requires that a
specified number of samples be drawn in the hospital.
D. Medication Assessment
1.
Beta-Blockers
Class
I
-
Patients receiving beta-blockers within the first 24 hours of
STEMI without adverse effects should continue to receive them
during the early convalescent phase of STEMI. (Level of Evidence:
A)
-
Patients without contraindications to beta-blockers who
did not receive them within the first 24 hours after STEMI
should have them started in the early convalescent phase. (Level
of Evidence: A)
-
3. Patients with early contraindications within the first 24
hours of STEMI should be reevaluated for candidacy for
beta-blocker therapy. (Level of Evidence: C)
There is overwhelming evidence for the benefits of early beta-blockade
in patients with STEMI and without contraindications to their
use (see Section
6.3.1.5 of the full-text guidelines). Benefits have
been demonstrated for patients with and without concomitant
fibrinolytic therapy, both early and late after STEMI. Meta-analysis
of trials from the prefibrinolytic era involving more than 24
000 patients receiving beta-blockers have shown a 14% relative
risk reduction in mortality through 7 days and a 23% reduction
in long-term
mortality.142
2.
Nitroglycerin
Class I
-
Intravenous nitroglycerin is indicated in the first 48 hours
after STEMI for treatment of persistent ischemia, CHF, or
hypertension. The decision to administer intravenous nitroglycerin
and the dose used should not preclude therapy with other proven
mortality-reducing interventions, such as beta-blockers or ACE
inhibitors. (Level of Evidence: B)
-
Intravenous, oral, or topical nitrates are useful beyond the
first 48 hours after STEMI for treatment of recurrent
angina or persistent CHF if their use does not preclude
therapy with beta-blockers or ACE inhibitors. (Level
of Evidence: B)
Class IIb
-
The continued use of nitrate therapy beyond the first 24 to 48
hours in the absence of continued or recurrent angina or CHF may
be helpful, although the benefit is likely to be small and is
not well established in contemporary practice. (Level of Evidence:
B)
Class III
-
Nitrates should not be administered to patients with systolic
pressure less than 90 mm Hg or greater than or equal to 30 mm
Hg below baseline, severe bradycardia (less than 50 bpm),
tachycardia (more than 100 bpm) or RV infarction. (Level of
Evidence: C)
3. Inhibition of the Renin-Angiotensin- Aldosterone
System
Class I
-
An ACE inhibitor should be administered orally during convalescence
from STEMI in patients who tolerate this class of medication,
and it should be continued over the long term. (Level of
Evidence: A)
-
An ARB should be administered to STEMI patients who are
intolerant of ACE inhibitors and have either clinical or
radiological signs of heart failure or LVEF less than
0.40. Valsartan and candesartan have demonstrated efficacy
for this recommendation. (Level of Evidence:
B)
-
Long-term aldosterone blockade should be prescribed for
post-STEMI patients without significant renal dysfunction
(creatinine should be less than or equal to 2.5 mg/dL
in men and less than or equal to 2.0 mg/dL in women) or
hyperkalemia (potassium should be less than or equal to
5.0 mEq/L) who are already receiving therapeutic doses
of an ACE inhibitor, have an LVEF less than or equal to
0.40, and have either symptomatic heart failure or
diabetes. (Level of Evidence: A)
Class IIa
-
In STEMI patients who tolerate ACE inhibitors, an ARB can be
useful as an alternative to ACE inhibitors provided there are
either clinical or radiological signs of heart failure or LVEF
is less than 0.40. Valsartan and candesartan have established
efficacy for this recommendation. (Level of Evidence:
B)
The use of ACE inhibitors in the initial management of the STEMI
patient was reviewed previously. The proportional benefit of
ACE inhibitor therapy is largest in higher-risk subgroups, including
those with previous infarction, heart failure, depressed LVEF,
and
tachycardia.143145 Survival benefit for patients more than
75 years old and for a low-risk subgroup without the features
noted above is
equivocal.144,145
Aldosterone blockade is another means of inhibiting the
renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system that has been applied to
patients in the post-STEMI setting. RALES (Randomized Aldactone
Evaluation Study) and EPHESUS (Eplerenone Post-Acute Myocardial
Infarction Heart Failure Efficacy and Survival Study) support
the long-term use of an aldosterone blocker in STEMI patients
with heart failure, an ejection fraction of 0.40 or less, or both,
provided the serum creatinine is less than or equal to 2.5 mg/dL
in men and less than or equal to 2.0 mg/dL in women and serum
potassium concentration is less than or equal to 5.0
mEq/L.146,147
The use of ARBs after STEMI has not been explored as thoroughly as
ACE inhibitors in STEMI
patients.148,149
Given the extensive randomized trial and routine clinical experience
with ACE inhibitors, they remain the logical first agent for
inhibition of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system in patients
convalescing from STEMI.150 Valsartan
monotherapy (target dose 160 mg twice daily) should be administered
to STEMI patients who are intolerant of ACE inhibitors and have
evidence of LV dysfunction. Valsartan monotherapy can be a useful
alternative to ACE inhibitors; the decision in individual patients
may be influenced by physician and patient preference, cost, and
anticipated side-effect profile.
4.
Antiplatelets
Class I
-
Aspirin 162 to 325 mg should be given on day 1 of STEMI and in
the absence of contraindications should be continued indefinitely on
a daily basis thereafter at a dose of 75 to 162 mg. (Level of
Evidence: A)
-
A thienopyridine (preferably clopidogrel) should be
administered to patients who are unable to take aspirin
because of hypersensitivity or major gastrointestinal
intolerance. (Level of Evidence: C)
-
For patients taking clopidogrel for whom CABG is planned, if
possible, the drug should be withheld for at least 5 days,
and preferably for 7, unless the urgency for
revascularization outweighs the risks of bleeding. (Level
of Evidence: B)
-
For patients who have undergone diagnostic cardiac
catheterization and for whom PCI is planned, clopidogrel
should be started and continued for at least 1 month after
bare metal stent implantation and for several months
after drug-eluting stent implantation (3 months for
sirolimus, 6 months for paclitaxel) and up to 12 months
in patients who are not at high risk for bleeding.
(Level of Evidence: B)
5.
Antithrombotics
Class I
-
Intravenous UFH (bolus of 60 U/kg, maximum 4000 U IV; initial
infusion 12 U/kg per hour, maximum of 1000 U/h) or LMWH should
be used in patients after STEMI who are at high risk for systemic
emboli (large or anterior MI, atrial fibrillation, previous
embolus, known LV thrombus, or cardiogenic shock). (Level of
Evidence: C)
Class IIa
-
It is reasonable that STEMI patients not undergoing reperfusion
therapy who do not have a contraindication to anticoagulation
be treated with intravenous or subcutaneous UFH or with subcutaneous
LMWH for at least 48 hours. In patients whose clinical condition
necessitates prolonged bedrest and/or minimized activities, it
is reasonable that treatment be continued until the patient is
ambulatory. (Level of Evidence: C)
Class IIb
-
Prophylaxis for deep venous thrombosis (DVT) with subcutaneous
LMWH (dosed appropriately for specific agent) or with subcutaneous
UFH, 7500 U to 12 500 U twice per day until completely ambulatory,
may be useful, but the effectiveness of such a strategy is not
well established in the contemporary era of routine aspirin
use and early mobilization. (Level of Evidence: C)
6. Oxygen
Class I
-
Supplemental oxygen therapy should be continued beyond the first
6 hours in STEMI patients with arterial oxygen desaturation
(SaO2 LESS
THAN 90%)
OR
OVERT
PULMONARY
CONGESTION.
(Level of Evidence: C)
E. Estimation of Infarct Size
Measurement of infarct size is an important element in the overall
care of patients with STEMI. There are 5 major modalities that
can be applied to sizing MI.
1. Electrocardiographic
Techniques
Class I
-
All patients with STEMI should have follow-up ECGs at 24 hours
and at hospital discharge to assess the success of reperfusion
and/or the extent of infarction, defined in part by the presence
or absence of new Q waves. (Level of Evidence: B)
2. Cardiac Biomarker
Methods
The most widely accepted method for quantifying infarction has been
the use of serial creatine kinase and the creatine kinase-MB
isoenzyme.
3. Radionuclide
Imaging
The most comprehensive assessment of STEMI with radionuclide imaging
was developed with the technetium sestamibi SPECT
approach.151 This approach
is well delineated in the ACC/AHA/ASNC Guidelines for the Clinical
Use of Cardiac Radionuclide
Imaging.152
4.
Echocardiography
Global and regional LV function provides an assessment of the
functional consequences of STEMI and ischemia. Readers are referred
to the ACC/AHA/ASE 2003 Guideline Update for the Clinical
Application of
Echocardiography153 and to Section
7.11.1.2 of the full-text STEMI guidelines.
5. Magnetic Resonance
Imaging
Measurement of infarct size by MRI is a promising new technique that
affords enhanced spatial resolution, thereby permitting more accurate
assessment of both the transmural and circumferential extent of
infarction.154 However, additional
experience and comparison with other methods of assessing infarct
size are required before any clinical recommendations can be
provided.
F. Hemodynamic Disturbances
1. Hemodynamic
Assessment
Class I
-
1. Pulmonary artery catheter monitoring should be performed for
the following:
-
a. Progressive hypotension, when
unresponsive to fluid administration or when fluid
administration may be contraindicated. (Level of
Evidence: C)
-
b. Suspected mechanical complications of
STEMI, (ie, VSR, papillary muscle rupture, or free
wall rupture with pericardial tamponade) if an
echocardiogram has not been performed. (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
2. Intra-arterial pressure monitoring should be performed
for the following:
-
a. Patients with severe hypotension
(systolic arterial pressure less than 80 mm Hg).
(Level of Evidence: C)
-
b. Patients receiving
vasopressor/inotropic agents. (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
c. Cardiogenic shock. (Level of
Evidence: C)
Class IIa
-
1. Pulmonary artery catheter monitoring can be useful for the
following:
-
a. Hypotension in a patient without
pulmonary congestion who has not responded to an initial
trial of fluid administration. (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
b. Cardiogenic shock. (Level of
Evidence: C)
-
c. Severe or progressive CHF or pulmonary
edema that does not respond rapidly to therapy. (Level
of Evidence: C)
-
d. Persistent signs of hypoperfusion
without hypotension or pulmonary congestion. (Level
of Evidence: C)
-
e. Patients receiving
vasopressor/inotropic agents. (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
2. Intra-arterial pressure monitoring can be useful for
patients receiving intravenous sodium nitroprusside or
other potent vasodilators. (Level of Evidence:
C)
Class IIb
-
Intra-arterial pressure monitoring might be considered in patients
receiving intravenous inotropic agents. (Level of Evidence:
C)
Class III
-
Pulmonary artery catheter monitoring is not recommended in patients
with STEMI without evidence of hemodynamic instability or
respiratory compromise. (Level of Evidence: C)
-
Intra-arterial pressure monitoring is not recommended for
patients with STEMI who have no pulmonary congestion
and have adequate tissue perfusion without use of
circulatory support measures. (Level of Evidence:
C)
2.
Hypotension
Class I
-
Rapid volume loading with an IV infusion should be administered
to patients without clinical evidence for volume overload.
(Level of Evidence: C)
-
Rhythm disturbances or conduction abnormalities causing
hypotension should be corrected. (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
Intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation should be performed
in patients who do not respond to other interventions,
unless further support is futile because of the
patients wishes or contraindications/unsuitability
for further invasive care. (Level of Evidence:
B)
-
Vasopressor support should be given for hypotension that
does not resolve after volume loading. (Level of
Evidence: C)
-
Echocardiography should be used to evaluate mechanical
complications unless these are assessed by invasive
measures. (Level of Evidence: C)
3. Low-Output
State
Class I
-
1. LV function and potential presence of a mechanical complication
should be assessed by echocardiography if these have not been
evaluated by invasive measures. (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
2. Recommended treatments for low-output states
include:
-
a. Inotropic support. (Level of
Evidence: B)
-
b. Intra-aortic counterpulsation. (Level
of Evidence: B)
-
c. Mechanical reperfusion with PCI or
CABG. (Level of Evidence: B)
-
d. Surgical correction of mechanical
complications. (Level of Evidence: B)
Class III
-
Beta-blockers or calcium channel antagonists should not be administered
to patients in a low-output state due to pump failure. (Level
of Evidence: B)
A preshock state of hypoperfusion with normal blood pressure may
develop before circulatory collapse and is manifested by cold
extremities, cyanosis, oliguria, or decreased
mentation.155 Hospital mortality
is high, so these patients should be aggressively diagnosed and
treated as though they had cardiogenic shock. The initial
pharmacological intervention for low cardiac output is often a
dobutamine infusion. Intra-aortic counterpulsation therapy may
be required to improve coronary artery perfusion pressure if
hypotension is present. If the blood pressure permits,
afterload-reducing agents should be added to decrease cardiac
work and pulmonary congestion. Coronary artery revascularization
of ischemic myocardium with either PCI or CABG has been shown
to decrease mortality in patients with cardiogenic shock and
is strongly recommended in suitable
candidates.75,108
Likewise, patients with VSR, papillary muscle rupture, or free
wall rupture with pericardial tamponade may benefit from emergency
surgical repair.
4. Pulmonary
Congestion
Class I
-
Oxygen supplementation to arterial saturation greater than 90% is
recommended for patients with pulmonary congestion. (Level of
Evidence: C)
-
Morphine sulfate should be given to patients with pulmonary
congestion. (Level of Evidence: C)
-
ACE inhibitors, beginning with titration of a short-acting
ACE inhibitor with a low initial dose (eg, 1 to 6.25
mg of captopril) should be given to patients with pulmonary
edema unless the systolic blood pressure is less than
100 mm Hg or more than 30 mm Hg below baseline. Patients
with pulmonary congestion and marginal or low blood
pressure often need circulatory support with inotropic
and vasopressor agents and/or intra-aortic balloon
counterpulsation to relieve pulmonary congestion and
maintain adequate perfusion. (Level of Evidence:
A)
-
Nitrates should be administered to patients with pulmonary
congestion unless the systolic blood pressure is less
than 100 mm Hg or more than 30 mm Hg below baseline.
Patients with pulmonary congestion and marginal or low
blood pressure often need circulatory support with inotropic
and vasopressor agents and/or intra-aortic balloon
counterpulsation to relieve pulmonary congestion and
maintain adequate perfusion. (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
A diuretic (low- to intermediate-dose furosemide, or
torsemide or bumetanide) should be administered to
patients with pulmonary congestion if there is associated
volume overload. Caution is advised for patients who have
not received volume expansion. (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
Beta-blockade should be initiated before discharge for
secondary prevention. For those who remain in heart
failure throughout the hospitalization, low doses should
be initiated, with gradual titration on an outpatient
basis. (Level of Evidence: B)
-
Long-term aldosterone blockade should be prescribed for
post-STEMI patients without significant renal dysfunction
(creatinine should be less than or equal to 2.5 mg/dL
in men and less than or equal to 2.0 mg/dL in women)
or hyperkalemia (potassium should be less than or equal
to 5.0 mEq/L) who are already receiving therapeutic doses
of an ACE inhibitor, have an LVEF less than or equal to
0.40, and have either symptomatic heart failure or
diabetes. (Level of Evidence: A)
-
Echocardiography should be performed urgently to estimate LV
and RV function and to exclude a mechanical complication.
(Level of Evidence: C)
Class IIb
-
It may be reasonable to insert an intra-aortic balloon pump
(IABP) for the management of patients with refractory pulmonary
congestion. (Level of Evidence: C)
Class III
-
Beta-blockers or calcium channel blockers should not be administered
acutely to STEMI patients with frank cardiac failure evidenced
by pulmonary congestion or signs of a low-output state. (Level
of Evidence: B)
The immediate management goals include adequate oxygenation and
preload reduction to relieve pulmonary congestion. Because of
sympathetic stimulation, the blood pressure should be elevated in
the presence of pulmonary edema. Patients with this appropriate
response can typically tolerate the required medications, all
of which lower blood pressure. However, iatrogenic cardiogenic
shock may result from aggressive simultaneous use of agents
that cause hypotension, initiating a cycle of
hypoperfusion-ischemia. If acute pulmonary edema is not associated
with elevation of the systemic blood pressure, impending cardiogenic
shock must be suspected. If pulmonary edema is associated with
hypotension, cardiogenic shock is diagnosed. Those patients often
need circulatory support with inotropic and vasopressor agents
and/or intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation to relieve pulmonary
congestion and maintain adequate perfusion (Figure
4) (See Section VII.F.5, and see Section 7.6.5 of the full-text
guidelines).

View larger version (28K):
[in
this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 4. Emergency management of
complicated ST-elevation myocardial infarction. The emergency management
of patients with cardiogenic shock, acute pulmonary edema, or both is outlined.
SBP indicates systolic blood pressure; IV, intravenous; BP, blood pressure;
ACE, angiotensin converting enzyme; MI, myocardial infarction. *Furosemide
less than 0.5 mg/kg for new-onset acute pulmonary edema without hypovolemia;
1 mg/kg for acute or chronic volume overload, renal insufficiency. Nesiritide
has not been studied adequately in patients with STEMI. Combinations of
medications, eg, dobutamine and dopamine, may be used. Modified with permission
from Guidelines 2000 for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency
Cardiovascular Care: Part 7: The Era of Reperfusion. Section 1: Acute Coronary
Syndromes (Acute Myocardial Infarction). Circulation. 2000;102(suppl
1):I-172I-216.26
|
|
5. Cardiogenic
Shock
Class I
-
Intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation is recommended for STEMI
patients when cardiogenic shock is not quickly reversed with
pharmacological therapy. The IABP is a stabilizing measure for
angiography and prompt revascularization. (Level of Evidence:
B)
-
Intra-arterial monitoring is recommended for the management of
STEMI patients with cardiogenic shock. (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
Early revascularization, either PCI or CABG, is recommended for
patients less than 75 years old with ST elevation or LBBB who
develop shock within 36 hours of MI and are suitable for
revascularization that can be performed within 18 hours of shock,
unless further support is futile because of the patients
wishes or contraindications/unsuitability for further invasive
care. (Level of Evidence: A)
-
Fibrinolytic therapy should be administered to STEMI
patients with cardiogenic shock who are unsuitable
for further invasive care and do not have contraindications
to fibrinolysis. (Level of Evidence: B)
-
Echocardiography should be used to evaluate mechanical
complications unless these are assessed by invasive
measures. (Level of Evidence: C)
Class IIa
-
Pulmonary artery catheter monitoring can be useful for the management
of STEMI patients with cardiogenic shock. (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
Early revascularization, either PCI or CABG, is reasonable
for selected patients 75 years or older with ST elevation
or LBBB who develop shock within 36 hours of MI and
are suitable for revascularization that can be performed
within 18 hours of shock. Patients with good prior
functional status who agree to invasive care may be
selected for such an invasive strategy. (Level of
Evidence: B)
Given the large overall treatment benefit of 13 lives saved per
100 patients treated in the SHOCK trial, early revascularization is
recommended for those less than 75 years who are suitable for
revascularization.75,108,156 Two other large registries reported a
substantial survival benefit for elderly patients who were selected
clinically on the basis of physician judgment.
Interventions should be performed as soon as possible. It is
recommended that patients who arrive at the hospital in cardiogenic
shock (15% of cases) or who develop it after hospital arrival
(85%) should be transferred to a regional tertiary care center
with revascularization facilities experienced with these patients.
When shock has resolved, ACE inhibitors and beta-blockers, initiated
in low doses with progressive increases as recommended in the
CHF guidelines, should be administered before
discharge.157 (See Section
7.6.7.6 of the full-text guidelines for discussion of
mechanical support for the failing heart.)
6. Right Ventricular
Infarction
Class I
-
1. Patients with inferior STEMI and hemodynamic compromise should
be assessed with a right precordial V4R lead to detect
ST-segment elevation and an echocardiogram to screen for RV
infarction. (See the ACC/AHA/ASE 2003 Guideline Update for the
Clinical Application of Echocardiography.) (Level of Evidence:
B)
-
2. The following principles apply to therapy of patients
with STEMI and RV infarction and ischemic
dysfunction:
-
a. Early reperfusion should be achieved if
possible. (Level of Evidence: C)
-
b. AV synchrony should be achieved, and
bradycardia should be corrected. (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
c. RV preload should be optimized, which
usually requires initial volume challenge in patients with
hemodynamic instability provided the jugular venous pressure is
normal or low. (Level of Evidence: C)
-
d. RV afterload should be optimized, which
usually requires therapy for concomitant LV dysfunction.
(Level of Evidence: C)
-
e. Inotropic support should be used for
hemodynamic instability not responsive to volume challenge.
(Level of Evidence: C)
Class IIa
-
After infarction that leads to clinically significant RV dysfunction,
it is reasonable to delay CABG surgery for 4 weeks to allow
recovery of contractile performance. (Level of Evidence:
C)
Treatment of RV ischemia/infarction includes early maintenance of
RV preload, reduction of RV afterload, inotropic support of the
dysfunctional RV, early
reperfusion,158 and maintenance
of AV synchrony.
7. Mechanical Causes of Heart Failure/Low-Output
Syndrome
a. Diagnosis
On physical examination, the presence of a new cardiac murmur
indicates the possibility of either a VSR or MR. A precise diagnosis
can usually be established with transthoracic or transesophageal
echocardiography.
b. Mitral Valve Regurgitation
Class I
-
Patients with acute papillary muscle rupture should be considered
for urgent cardiac surgical repair, unless further support is
considered futile because of the patients wishes or
contraindications/unsuitability for further invasive care. (Level
of Evidence: B)
-
CABG surgery should be undertaken at the same time as mitral
valve surgery. (Level of Evidence: B)
The patient should be stabilized with an IABP, inotropic support,
and afterload reduction (to reduce regurgitant volume and pulmonary
congestion) while emergency surgery is arranged.
c. Ventricular Septal Rupture After
STEMI
Class I
-
Patients with STEMI complicated by the development of a VSR
should be considered for urgent cardiac surgical repair, unless
further support is considered futile because of the patients
wishes or contraindications/unsuitability for further invasive
care. (Level of Evidence: B)
-
CABG should be undertaken at the same time as repair of the
VSR. (Level of Evidence: B)
Insertion of an IABP and prompt surgical referral are recommended
for almost every patient with an acute VSR. Invasive monitoring
is recommended in all patients, together with judicious use of
inotropes and a vasodilator to maintain optimal hemodynamics.
Surgical repair usually involves excision of all necrotic tissue
and patch repair of the VSR, together with coronary artery grafting.
d. Left Ventricular Free-Wall
Rupture
Class I
-
Patients with free-wall rupture should be considered for urgent
cardiac surgical repair, unless further support is considered
futile because of the patients wishes or
contraindications/unsuitability for further invasive care. (Level
of Evidence: B)
-
CABG should be undertaken at the same time as repair of
free-wall rupture. (Level of Evidence:
C)
Surgery includes repair of the ventricle by a direct suture
technique or patch to cover the ventricular
perforation159 in addition
to CABG as needed.
e. Left Ventricular Aneurysm
Class IIa
-
It is reasonable that patients with STEMI who develop a ventricular
aneurysm associated with intractable ventricular tachyarrhythmias
and/or pump failure unresponsive to medical and catheter-based
therapy be considered for LV aneurysmectomy and CABG surgery.
(Level of Evidence: B)
f. Mechanical Support of the Failing
Heart
INTRA-AORTIC
BALLOON
COUNTERPULSATION
Class I
-
Intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation should be used in STEMI
patients with hypotension (systolic blood pressure less than
90 mm Hg or 30 mm Hg below baseline mean arterial pressure)
who do not respond to other interventions, unless further support
is futile because of the patients wishes or
contraindications/unsuitability for further invasive care. See
Section 7.6.2 of the full-text guidelines. (Level of Evidence:
B)
-
Intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation is recommended for
STEMI patients with low-output state. See Section 7.6.3
of the full-text guidelines. (Level of Evidence:
B)
-
Intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation is recommended for
STEMI patients when cardiogenic shock is not quickly
reversed with pharmacological therapy. IABP is a
stabilizing measure for angiography and prompt
revascularization. See Section 7.6.5 of the full-text
guidelines. (Level of Evidence: B)
-
Intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation should be used in
addition to medical therapy for STEMI patients with
recurrent ischemic-type chest discomfort and signs
of hemodynamic instability, poor LV function, or a
large area of myocardium at risk. Such patients should be
referred urgently for cardiac catheterization and should
undergo revascularization as needed. See Section 7.8.2 of
the full-text guidelines. (Level of Evidence: C)
Class IIa
-
It is reasonable to manage STEMI patients with refractory polymorphic
VT with intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation to reduce myocardial
ischemia. See Section
7.7.1.2 of the full-text guidelines.
(Level of Evidence: B)
Class IIb
-
1. It may be reasonable to use intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation
in the management of STEMI patients with refractory pulmonary
congestion. See Section 7.6.4 of the full-text guidelines.
(Level of Evidence: C)
Selected patients with cardiogenic shock after STEMI, especially if
not candidates for revascularization, may be considered for either
a short- or long-term mechanical support device to serve as a
bridge to recovery or to subsequent cardiac transplantation.
G. Arrhythmias After STEMI
1. Ventricular
Arrhythmias
a. Ventricular Fibrillation
Class I
-
1. Ventricular fibrillation (VF) or pulseless VT should be treated
with an unsynchronized electric shock with an initial monophasic
shock energy of 200 J; if unsuccessful, a second shock of 200
to 300 J should be given, and then, if necessary, a third shock
of 360 J. (Level of Evidence: B)
Class IIa
-
1. It is reasonable that VF or pulseless VT that is refractory to
electrical shock be treated with amiodarone (300 mg or 5 mg/kg,
IV bolus) followed by a repeat unsynchronized electric shock.
(Level of Evidence: B)
-
2. It is reasonable to correct electrolyte and acid-base
disturbances (potassium greater than 4.0 mEq/L and
magnesium greater than 2.0 mg/dL) to prevent recurrent
episodes of VF once an initial episode of VF has been
treated. (Level of Evidence: C)
Class IIb
-
1. It may be reasonable to treat VT or shock-refractory VF with
boluses of intravenous procainamide. However, this has limited
value owing to the length of time required for administration.
(Level of Evidence: C)
Class III
-
1. Prophylactic administration of antiarrhythmic therapy is not
recommended when using fibrinolytic agents. (Level of Evidence:
B)
There is no convincing evidence that the prophylactic use of
lidocaine reduces mortality, and the prior practice of routine
(prophylactic) administration of lidocaine to all patients with
known or suspected STEMI has been largely abandoned. VF should
be treated with an unsynchronized electric shock using an initial
monophasic shock energy of 200 J. If this is unsuccessful, a
second shock using 200 to 300 J and, if necessary, a third shock
using 360 J are
indicated.160
b. Ventricular Tachycardia
Class I
-
1. Sustained (more than 30 seconds or causing hemodynamic collapse)
polymorphic VT should be treated with an unsynchronized electric
shock with an initial monophasic shock energy of 200 J; if
unsuccessful, a second shock of 200 to 300 J should be given,
and, if necessary, a third shock of 360 J. (Level of Evidence:
B)
-
2. Episodes of sustained monomorphic VT associated with
angina, pulmonary edema, or hypotension (blood pressure
less than 90 mm Hg) should be treated with a synchronized
electric shock of 100 J initial monophasic shock energy.
Increasing energies may be used if not initially
successful. Brief anesthesia is desirable if hemodynamically
tolerable. (Level of Evidence: B)
-
3. Sustained monomorphic VT not associated with angina,
pulmonary edema, or hypotension (blood pressure less
than 90 mm Hg) should be treated with:
-
a. Amiodarone: 150 mg infused over 10 minutes
(alternative dose 5 mg/kg); repeat 150 mg every 10 to 15 minutes
as needed. Alternative infusion: 360 mg over 6 hours (1 mg/min),
then 540 mg over the next 18 hours (0.5 mg/min). The total
cumulative dose, including additional doses given during cardiac
arrest, must not exceed 2.2 g over 24 hours. (Level of Evidence:
B)
-
b. Synchronized electrical cardioversion
starting at monophasic energies of 50 J (brief anesthesia
is necessary). (Level of Evidence: B)
Class IIa
-
1. It is reasonable to manage refractory polymorphic VT by:
-
a. Aggressive attempts to reduce myocardial
ischemia and adrenergic stimulation, including therapies such
as beta-adrenoceptor blockade, IABP use, and consideration of
emergency PCI/CABG surgery. (Level of Evidence: B)
-
b. Aggressive normalization of serum
potassium to greater than 4.0 mEq/L and of magnesium
to greater than 2.0 mg/dL. (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
c. If the patient has bradycardia to a
rate less than 60 beats per minute or long QTc, temporary
pacing at a higher rate may be instituted. (Level of
Evidence: C)
Class IIb
-
1. It is may be useful to treat sustained monomorphic VT not
associated with angina, pulmonary edema, or hypotension (blood
pressure less than 90 mm Hg) with a procainamide bolus and infusion.
(Level of Evidence: C)
Class III
-
1. The routine use of prophylactic antiarrhythmic drugs (ie,
lidocaine) is not indicated for suppression of isolated ventricular
premature beats, couplets, runs of accelerated idioventricular
rhythm, or nonsustained VT. (Level of Evidence: B)
-
2. The routine use of prophylactic antiarrhythmic therapy is
not indicated when fibrinolytic agents are administered.
(Level of Evidence: B)
Management Strategies for VT. Cardioversion is always indicated
for episodes of sustained hemodynamically compromising
VT.161 Episodes of sustained
VT that are somewhat better tolerated hemodynamically may initially
be treated with drug regimens, including amiodarone or
procainamide.
c. Ventricular Premature Beats
Class III
-
1. Treatment of isolated ventricular premature beats, couplets,
and nonsustained VT is not recommended unless they lead to
hemodynamic compromise. (Level of Evidence: A)
Before the present era of care of the STEMI patient with antiplatelet
therapy, beta-blockade, ACE inhibitors, and, above all, reperfusion
strategies, it was thought that ventricular warning arrhythmias
preceded VF. Careful monitoring has refuted this concept, and
treatment of these rhythm disturbances is not recommended unless
they lead to hemodynamic compromise.
d. Accelerated Idioventricular Rhythms and Accelerated
Junctional Rhythms
Class III
-
1. Antiarrhythmic therapy is not indicated for accelerated
idioventricular rhythm. (Level of Evidence: C)
-
2. Antiarrhythmic therapy is not indicated for accelerated
junctional rhythm. (Level of Evidence:
C)
e. Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Implantation
in Patients After STEMI
Class I
-
1. An implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) is indicated
for patients with VF or hemodynamically significant sustained
VT more than 2 days after STEMI, provided the arrhythmia is
not judged to be due to transient or reversible ischemia or
reinfarction. (Level of Evidence: A)
-
2. An ICD is indicated for patients without spontaneous VF
or sustained VT more than 48 hours after STEMI whose
STEMI occurred at least 1 month previously, who have
an LVEF between 0.31 and 0.40, demonstrate additional
evidence of electrical instability (eg, nonsustained VT),
and have inducible VF or sustained VT on
electrophysiological testing. (Level of Evidence:
B)
Class IIa
-
1. If there is reduced LVEF (0.30 or less), at least 1 month
after STEMI and 3 months after coronary artery revascularization,
it is reasonable to implant an ICD in post STEMI patients without
spontaneous VF or sustained VT more than 48 hours after STEMI.
(Level of Evidence: B)
Class IIb
-
1. The usefulness of an ICD is not well established in STEMI
patients without spontaneous VF or sustained VT more than 48
hours after STEMI who have a reduced LVEF (0.31 to 0.40) at
least 1 month after STEMI but who have no additional evidence
of electrical instability (eg, nonsustained VT). (Level of
Evidence: B)
-
2. The usefulness of an ICD is not well established in
STEMI patients without spontaneous VF or sustained VT more
than 48 hours after STEMI who have a reduced LVEF (0.31
to 0.40) at least 1 month after STEMI and additional
evidence of electrical instability (eg, nonsustained VT) but who
do not have inducible VF or sustained VT on electrophysiological
testing. (Level of Evidence: B)
Class III
-
1. An ICD is not indicated in STEMI patients who do not experience
spontaneous VF or sustained VT more than 48 hours after STEMI
and in whom the LVEF is greater than 0.40 at least 1 month after
STEMI. (Level of Evidence: C)
See the full-text guidelines for discussion.
2. Supraventricular Arrhythmias/Atrial
Fibrillation
Class I
-
1. Sustained atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter in patients
with hemodynamic compromise or ongoing ischemia should be treated
with one or more of the following:
-
a. Synchronized cardioversion with an
initial monophasic shock of 200 J for atrial fibrillation
and 50 J for flutter, preceded by brief general anesthesia
or conscious sedation whenever possible. (Level
of Evidence: C)
-
b. For episodes of atrial fibrillation
that do not respond to electrical cardioversion or
recur after a brief period of sinus rhythm, the use of
antiarrhythmic therapy aimed at slowing the ventricular
response is indicated. One or more of these pharmacological
agents may be used:
-
i. Intravenous
amiodarone.162
(Level of Evidence: C)
-
ii. Intravenous digoxin
for rate control principally for patients with severe LV
dysfunction and heart failure. (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
2. Sustained atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter in
patients with ongoing ischemia but without hemodynamic
compromise should be treated with one or more of the
following:
-
a. Beta-adrenergic blockade is preferred,
unless contraindicated. (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
b. Intravenous diltiazem or verapamil.
(Level of Evidence: C)
-
c. Synchronized cardioversion with an
initial monophasic shock of 200 J for atrial fibrillation
and 50 J for flutter, preceded by brief general anesthesia
or conscious sedation whenever possible. (Level
of Evidence: C)
-
3. For episodes of sustained atrial fibrillation or flutter
without hemodynamic compromise or ischemia, rate control
is indicated. In addition, patients with sustained atrial
fibrillation or flutter should be given anticoagulant
therapy. Consideration should be given to cardioversion
to sinus rhythm in patients with a history of atrial
fibrillation or flutter prior to STEMI. (Level of
Evidence: C)
4. Reentrant paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia,
because of its rapid rate, should be treated with the
following in the sequence shown:
-
a. Carotid sinus massage. (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
b. Intravenous adenosine (6 mg
x 1 over 1 to 2
seconds; if no response, 12 mg IV after 1 to 2 minutes may be
given; repeat 12 mg dose if needed. (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
c. Intravenous beta-adrenergic blockade
with metoprolol (2.5 to 5.0 mg every 2 to 5 minutes to a
total of 15 mg over 10 to 15 minutes) or atenolol (2.5
to 5.0 mg over 2 minutes to a total of 10 mg in 10 to 15 minutes).
(Level of Evidence: C)
-
d. Intravenous diltiazem (20 mg [0.25
mg/kg]) over 2 minutes followed by an infusion of 10
mg/h). (Level of Evidence: C)
-
e. Intravenous digoxin, recognizing that
there may be a delay of at least 1 hour before
pharmacological effects appear (8 to 15 mcg/kg [0.6 to
1.0 mg in a person weighing 70 kg]). (Level of Evidence:
C)
Class III
-
1. Treatment of atrial premature beats is not indicated. (Level
of Evidence: C)
See the full-text guidelines for discussion.
3.
Bradyarrhythmias
See Table 3 for recommendations.
View this
table:
[in
this window]
[in a new window]
|
TABLE 3. Recommendations for Treatment of
Atrioventricular and Intraventricular Conduction Disturbances During STEMI |
|
a. Acute Treatment of Conduction Disturbances
and Bradyarrhythmias
VENTRICULAR
ASYSTOLE
Class I
-
1. Prompt resuscitative measures, including chest compressions,
atropine, vasopressin, epinephrine, and temporary pacing, should
be administered to treat ventricular asystole. (Level of
Evidence: B)
b. Use of Permanent
Pacemakers
PERMANENT
PACING
FOR
BRADYCARDIA
OR
CONDUCTION
BLOCKS
ASSOCIATED
WITH
STEMI
Class I
-
1. Permanent ventricular pacing is indicated for persistent
second-degree AV block in the His-Purkinje system with bilateral
bundle-branch block or third-degree AV block within or below
the His-Purkinje system after STEMI. (Level of Evidence:
B)
-
2. Permanent ventricular pacing is indicated for transient
advanced second- or third-degree infranodal AV block and
associated bundle-branch block. If the site of block
is uncertain, an electrophysiological study may be necessary.
(Level of Evidence: B)
-
3. Permanent ventricular pacing is indicated for persistent
and symptomatic second- or third-degree AV block. (Level
of Evidence: C)
Class IIb
-
1. Permanent ventricular pacing may be considered for persistent
second- or third-degree AV block at the AV node level. (Level
of Evidence: B)
Class III
-
1. Permanent ventricular pacing is not recommended for transient
AV block in the absence of intraventricular conduction defects.
(Level of Evidence: B)
-
2. Permanent ventricular pacing is not recommended for
transient AV block in the presence of isolated left
anterior fascicular block. (Level of Evidence:
B)
-
3. Permanent ventricular pacing is not recommended for
acquired left anterior fascicular block in the absence of AV block.
(Level of Evidence: B)
-
4. Permanent ventricular pacing is not recommended for
persistent first-degree AV block in the presence of
bundle-branch block that is old or of indeterminate
age. (Level of Evidence: B)
Indications for permanent pacing after STEMI in patients experiencing
AV block are related in large measure to the presence of
intraventricular conduction defects (Table 3).
Unlike some other indications for permanent pacing, the criteria
for patients with STEMI and AV block do not necessarily depend
on the presence of symptoms. Furthermore, the requirement for
temporary pacing in STEMI does not by itself constitute an indication
for permanent pacing.163
SINUS
NODE
DYSFUNCTION
AFTER
STEMI
Class I
-
1. Symptomatic sinus bradycardia, sinus pauses greater than 3
seconds, or sinus bradycardia with a heart rate less than 40 bpm
and associated hypotension or signs of systemic hemodynamic
compromise should be treated with an intravenous bolus of atropine
0.6 to 1.0 mg. If bradycardia is persistent and maximal (2 mg)
doses of atropine have been used, transcutaneous or transvenous
(preferably atrial) temporary pacing should be instituted.
(Level of Evidence: C)
The published ACC/AHA Guidelines164
for Implantation of Pacemakers should be used to guide therapy
in STEMI patients with persistent sinus node dysfunction.
PACING
MODE
SELECTION
IN STEMI
PATIENTS
Class I
-
1. All patients who have an indication for permanent pacing after
STEMI should be evaluated for ICD indications. (Level of Evidence:
C)
Class IIa
-
1. It is reasonable to implant a permanent dual-chamber pacing
system in STEMI patients who need permanent pacing and are in
sinus rhythm. It is reasonable that patients in permanent atrial
fibrillation or flutter receive a single-chamber ventricular
device. (Level of Evidence: C)
-
2. It is reasonable to evaluate all patients who have an
indication for permanent pacing after STEMI for
biventricular pacing (cardiac resynchronization therapy).
(Level of Evidence: C)
When a permanent pacemaker is being considered for a post-STEMI
patient, the clinician should address 2 additional questions
regarding the patient: is there an indication for biventricular
pacing, and is there an indication for ICD
use?165 The algorithm to
define whether an ICD is indicated is contained in Figure
5.

View larger version (20K):
[in
this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 5. Algorithm to aid in selection
of ICD in patients with STEMI and diminished ejection fraction (EF). Appropriate
management path is selected based on LVEF measured at least 1 month after
STEMI. These criteria, which are based on published data, form the basis
for the full-text guidelines in Section
7.7.1.5. All patients, whether an ICD is implanted or not,
should receive medical therapy as outlined in the guidelines. VF indicates
ventricular fibrillation; VII, ventricular tachycardia; STEMI, ST-elevation
myocardial infarction; NSVT, nonsustained VT; LOE, level of evidence; EPS,
electrophysiological studies; LVEF, left ventricular EF.
|
|
H. Recurrent Chest Pain After STEMI
1.
Pericarditis
Class I
-
1. Aspirin is recommended for treatment of pericarditis after
STEMI. Doses as high as 650 mg orally (enteric) every 4 to 6
hours may be needed. (Level of Evidence: B)
-
2. Anticoagulation should be immediately discontinued if
pericardial effusion develops or increases. (Level
of Evidence: C)
Class IIa
-
1. For episodes of pericarditis after STEMI that are not adequately
controlled with aspirin, it is reasonable to administer 1 or
more of the following:
-
a. Colchicine 0.6 mg every 12 hours
orally. (Level of Evidence: B)
-
b. Acetaminophen 500 mg orally every 6
hours. (Level of Evidence: C)
Class IIb
-
1. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs may be considered for
pain relief; however, they should not be used for extended periods
because of their continuous effect on platelet function, an
increased risk of myocardial scar thinning, and infarct expansion.
(Level of Evidence: B)
-
2. Corticosteroids might be considered only as a last resort
in patients with pericarditis refractory to aspirin or
nonsteroidal drugs. Although corticosteroids are
effective for pain relief, their use is associated with
an increased risk of scar thinning and myocardial rupture.
(Level of Evidence: C)
Class III
-
1. Ibuprofen should not be used for pain relief because it blocks
the antiplatelet effect of aspirin and can cause myocardial
scar thinning and infarct expansion. (Level of Evidence:
B)
2. Recurrent
Ischemia/Infarction
Class I
-
1. Patients with recurrent ischemic-type chest discomfort after
initial reperfusion therapy for STEMI should undergo escalation
of medical therapy with nitrates and beta-blockers to decrease
myocardial oxygen demand and reduce ischemia. Intravenous
anticoagulation should be initiated if not already accomplished.
(Level of Evidence: B)
-
2. In addition to escalation of medical therapy, patients
with recurrent ischemic-type chest discomfort and signs
of hemodynamic instability, poor LV function, or a large area
of myocardium at risk should be referred urgently for cardiac
catheterization and undergo revascularization as needed. Insertion
of an IABP should also be considered. (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
3. Patients with recurrent ischemic-type chest discomfort
who are considered candidates for revascularization
should undergo coronary arteriography and PCI or CABG
as dictated by coronary anatomy. (Level of Evidence:
B)
Class IIa
-
1. It is reasonable to (re)administer fibrinolytic therapy to
patients with recurrent ST elevation and ischemic-type chest
discomfort who are not considered candidates for revascularization
or for whom coronary angiography and PCI cannot be rapidly (ideally
within 60 minutes from the onset of recurrent discomfort)
implemented. (Level of Evidence: C)
Class III
-
1. Streptokinase should not be readministered to treat recurrent
ischemia/infarction in patients who received a
nonfibrin-specific fibrinolytic agent more than 5 days
previously to treat the acute STEMI event. (Level of Evidence:
C)
Patients with recurrent ischemic-type chest discomfort should
undergo escalation of medical therapy that includes beta-blockers
(intravenously and then orally) and nitrates (sublingually and
then intravenously); consideration should be given to initiation
of intravenous anticoagulation if the patient is not already
therapeutically anticoagulated. Secondary causes of recurrent
ischemia, such as poorly controlled heart failure, anemia, and
arrhythmias, should be corrected.
I. Other Complications
1. Ischemic
Stroke
Class I
-
1. Neurological consultation should be obtained in STEMI patients
who have an acute ischemic stroke. (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
2. STEMI patients who have an acute ischemic stroke should
be evaluated with echocardiography, neuroimaging, and
vascular imaging studies to determine the cause of
the stroke. (Level of Evidence: C)
-
3. STEMI patients with acute ischemic stroke and persistent
atrial fibrillation should receive lifelong moderate-intensity
(international normalized ratio [INR] 2 to 3) warfarin therapy.
(Level of Evidence: A)
-
4. STEMI patients with or without acute ischemic stroke who
have a cardiac source of embolism (atrial fibrillation,
mural thrombus, or akinetic segment) should receive
moderate-intensity (INR 2 to 3) warfarin therapy (in
addition to aspirin). The duration of warfarin therapy
should be dictated by clinical circumstances (eg, at
least 3 months for patients with an LV mural thrombus
or akinetic segment and indefinitely in patients with
persistent atrial fibrillation). The patient should receive
LMWH or UFH until adequately anticoagulated with warfarin.
(Level of Evidence: B)
Class IIa
-
1. It is reasonable to assess the risk of ischemic stroke in
patients with STEMI. (Level of Evidence: A)
-
2. It is reasonable that STEMI patients with nonfatal acute
ischemic stroke receive supportive care to minimize
complications and maximize functional outcome. (Level
of Evidence: C)
Class IIb
-
1. Carotid angioplasty/stenting, 4 to 6 weeks after ischemic
stroke, might be considered in STEMI patients who have an acute
ischemic stroke attributable to an internal carotid
arteryorigin stenosis of at least 50% and who have a high
surgical risk of morbidity/mortality early after STEMI. (Level
of Evidence: C)
An algorithm for evaluation and antithrombotic therapy for ischemic
stroke is shown in Figure 35 of the full-text guideline.
2. DVT and Pulmonary
Embolism
Class I
-
1. DVT or pulmonary embolism after STEMI should be treated with
full-dose LMWH for a minimum of 5 days and until the patient
is adequately anticoagulated with warfarin. Start warfarin
concurrently with LMWH and titrate to INR of 2 to 3. (Level
of Evidence: A)
-
2. Patients with CHF after STEMI who are hospitalized for
prolonged periods, unable to ambulate, or considered at
high risk for DVT and are not otherwise anticoagulated
should receive low-dose heparin prophylaxis, preferably
with LMWH. (Level of Evidence: A)
J. CABG Surgery After STEMI
1. Timing of
Surgery
Class IIa
-
1. In patients who have had a STEMI, CABG mortality is elevated
for the first 3 to 7 days after infarction, and the benefit of
revascularization must be balanced against this increased risk.
Patients who have been stabilized (no ongoing ischemia, hemodynamic
compromise, or life-threatening arrhythmia) after STEMI and who
have incurred a significant fall in LV function should have their
surgery delayed to allow myocardial recovery to occur. If critical
anatomy exists, revascularization should be undertaken during
the index hospitalization. (Level of Evidence:
B)
The Writing Committee believes that if stable STEMI patients with
preserved LV function require surgical revascularization, then
CABG can be undertaken within several days of the infarction without
an increased risk.
2. Arterial
Grafting
Class I
-
1. An internal mammary artery graft to a significantly stenosed
left anterior descending coronary artery should be used whenever
possible in patients undergoing CABG after STEMI. (Level of
Evidence: B)
3. CABG for Recurrent Ischemia After
STEMI
Class I
-
1. Urgent CABG is indicated if the coronary angiogram reveals
anatomy that is unsuitable for PCI. (Level of Evidence:
B)
4. Elective CABG Surgery After STEMI in Patients
With Angina
Class I
-
1. CABG is recommended for patients with stable angina who have
significant left main coronary artery stenosis. (Level of
Evidence: A)
-
2. CABG is recommended for patients with stable angina who
have left main equivalent disease: significant (at least
70%) stenosis of the proximal left anterior descending
coronary artery and proximal left circumflex artery.
(Level of Evidence: A)
-
3. CABG is recommended for patients with stable angina who
have 3-vessel disease (Survival benefit is greater when
LVEF is less than 0.50). (Level of Evidence:
A)
-
4. CABG is beneficial for patients with stable angina who
have 1- or 2-vessel coronary disease without significant
proximal left anterior descending coronary artery stenosis
but with a large area of viable myocardium and high-risk
criteria on noninvasive testing. (Level of Evidence:
B)
-
5. CABG is recommended in patients with stable angina who
have 2-vessel disease with significant proximal left
anterior descending coronary artery stenosis and either
ejection fraction less than 0.50 or demonstrable ischemia
on noninvasive testing. (Level of Evidence:
A)
The role of surgical revascularization has been reviewed extensively
in the ACC/AHA Guidelines for CABG
Surgery.166 Consideration for
revascularization after STEMI includes PCI and CABG. Providers
should individualize patient management on the basis of clinical
circumstances, available revascularization options, and patient
preference.
5. CABG Surgery After STEMI and Antiplatelet
Agents
Class I
-
1. Aspirin should not be withheld before elective or nonelective
CABG after STEMI. (Level of Evidence: C)
-
2. Aspirin (75 to 325 mg daily) should be prescribed as soon
as possible (within 24 hours) after CABG unless
contraindicated. (Level of Evidence:
B)
-
3. In patients taking clopidogrel in whom elective CABG is
planned, the drug should be withheld for 5 to 7 days.
(Level of Evidence: B)
STEMI patients undergoing revascularization frequently receive 1
or more antiplatelet agents and heparin, all of which may increase
risk of serious bleeding during and after cardiac surgery. Delaying
surgery until platelet function has recovered may not be feasible
in many circumstances. In patients treated with the small-molecule
GP IIb/IIIa receptor antagonists, tirofiban and eptifibatide,
platelet function returns toward normal within 4 hours of stopping
treatment. Platelet aggregation does not return toward normal
for more than 48 hours in patients treated with abciximab. Management
strategies, other than delaying surgery, include platelet transfusions
for patients who were recently treated with abciximab, reduced
heparin dosing during cardiopulmonary bypass, and possible use
of antifibrinolytic agents such as aprotinin or tranexamic
acid.167 Because clopidogrel, when
added to aspirin, increases the risk of bleeding during major
surgery in patients who are scheduled for elective CABG,
clopidogrel should be withheld for at least 5
days168 and preferably for 7
days before surgery.169
K. Convalescence, Discharge, and Post-MI Care
1. Risk Stratification at Hospital
Discharge
The risk stratification approach for decision-making about catheterization
is described in Figure 6. The suggested algorithm
for electrophysiological testing and ICD placement is shown in
Figure 5.

View larger version (31K):
[in
this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 6. Evidence-based approach to
need for catheterization (cath) and revascularization after STEMI. This algorithm
shows treatment paths for patients who initially undergo a primary invasive
strategy, receive fibrinolytic therapy, or do not undergo reperfusion therapy
for STEMI. Patients who have not undergone a primary invasive strategy and
have no high-risk features should undergo functional evaluation with one
of the noninvasive tests shown. When clinically significant ischemia is detected,
patients should undergo catheterization and revascularization as indicated;
if no clinically significant ischemia is detected, medical therapy is prescribed
after STEMI. *Please see Table 23 of the ACC/AHA Guidelines for the Management
of Patients With Chronic Stable Angina for further definition.
Please see Table
3, Section
6.3.1.6.2., and Section 7.3. in the full-text STEMI guidelines
for further discussion. STEMI indicates ST-elevation myocardial infarction;
EF, ejection fraction; ECG, electrocardiography.
|
|
a. Role of Exercise
Testing
Class I
-
1. Exercise testing should be performed either in the hospital or
early after discharge in STEMI patients not selected for cardiac
catheterization and without high-risk features to assess the presence
and extent of inducible ischemia. (Level of Evidence:
B)
-
2. In patients with baseline abnormalities that compromise
ECG interpretation, echocardiography or myocardial
perfusion imaging should be added to standard exercise
testing. (Level of Evidence: B)
Class IIb
-
1. Exercise testing might be considered before discharge of
patients recovering from STEMI to guide the postdischarge exercise
prescription or to evaluate the functional significance of a
coronary lesion previously identified at angiography. (Level
of Evidence: C)
Class III
-
1. Exercise testing should not be performed within 2 to 3 days of
STEMI in patients who have not undergone successful reperfusion.
(Level of Evidence: C)
-
2. Exercise testing should not be performed to evaluate
patients with STEMI who have unstable postinfarction
angina, decompensated CHF, life-threatening cardiac
arrhythmias, noncardiac conditions that severely limit
their ability to exercise, or other absolute
contraindications to exercise
testing.170
(Level of Evidence: C)
-
3. Exercise testing should not be used for risk
stratification in patients with STEMI who have already
been selected for cardiac catheterization. (Level of
Evidence: C)
Exercise testing after STEMI may be performed to (1) assess
functional capacity and the patients ability to perform
tasks at home and at work; (2) establish exercise parameters
for cardiac rehabilitation; (3) evaluate the efficacy of the
patients current medical regimen; (4) risk-stratify the
post-STEMI patient according to the likelihood of a subsequent
cardiac
event;171175
(5) evaluate chest pain symptoms after STEMI; and (6) provide
reassurance to patients regarding their functional capacity after
STEMI as a guide to returning to work.
b. Role of Echocardiography
Noninvasive imaging in patients recovering from STEMI includes
echocardiography and radionuclide imaging. This section discusses
the role of echocardiography. (See Sections
7.11.1.3,
7.11.1.4, and
7.11.1.5 of the full-text guidelines for additional
discussion on imaging considerations.)
Class I
-
1. Echocardiography should be used in patients with STEMI not
undergoing LV angiography to assess baseline LV function, especially
if the patient is hemodynamically unstable. (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
2. Echocardiography should be used to evaluate patients
with inferior STEMI, clinical instability, and clinical
suspicion of RV infarction. (See ACC/AHA Guidelines for Clinical
Application of
Echocardiography.153) (Level
of Evidence: C)
-
3. Echocardiography should be used in patients with STEMI to
evaluate suspected complications, including acute MR,
cardiogenic shock, infarct expansion, VSR, intracardiac
thrombus, and pericardial effusion. (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
4. Stress echocardiography (or myocardial perfusion imaging)
should be used in patients with STEMI for in-hospital or
early postdischarge assessment for inducible ischemia
when baseline abnormalities are expected to compromise
ECG interpretation. (Level of Evidence: C)
Class IIa
-
1. Echocardiography is reasonable in patients with STEMI to
re-evaluate ventricular function during recovery when results
are used to guide therapy. (Level of Evidence: C)
-
2. Dobutamine echocardiography (or myocardial perfusion
imaging) is reasonable in hemodynamically and electrically
stable patients 4 or more days after STEMI to assess
myocardial viability when required to define the potential
efficacy of revascularization. (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
3. In STEMI patients who have not undergone contrast
ventriculography, echocardiography is reasonable to
assess ventricular function after revascularization.
(Level of Evidence: C)
Class III
-
1. Echocardiography should not be used for early routine reevaluation
in patients with STEMI in the absence of any change in clinical
status or revascularization procedure. Reassessment of LV function
30 to 90 days later may be reasonable. (Level of Evidence:
C)
The use of echocardiography in STEMI is discussed in detail in
the ACC/AHA/ASE 2003 Guideline Update for the Clinical Application
of
Echocardiography.153
c. Exercise Myocardial Perfusion
Imaging
Noninvasive imaging in patients recovering from STEMI includes
echocardiography and radionuclide imaging. This section discusses
the role of exercise myocardial perfusion imaging. (See Sections
7.11.1.2,
7.11.1.4, and
7.11.1.5 of the full-text guidelines for additional
discussion on imaging considerations.)
Class I
-
1. Dipyridamole or adenosine stress perfusion nuclear scintigraphy
or dobutamine echocardiography before or early after discharge
should be used in patients with STEMI who are not undergoing
cardiac catheterization to look for inducible ischemia in patients
judged to be unable to exercise. (Level of Evidence:
B)
Class IIa
-
1. Myocardial perfusion imaging or dobutamine echocardiography is
reasonable in hemodynamically and electrically stable patients 4
to 10 days after STEMI to assess myocardial viability when required
to define the potential efficacy of revascularization. (Level
of Evidence: C)
Recommended strategies for exercise test evaluations after STEMI are
presented in Figure 6. These strategies and the data
on which they are based are reviewed in more detail in the
ACC/AHA 2002 Guideline Update for Exercise
Testing.170
d. LV Function
Noninvasive imaging in patients recovering from STEMI includes
echocardiography and radionuclide imaging. This section discusses
the importance of measurement of LV function. Either of the
above imaging techniques can provide clinically useful information.
Class I
-
1. LVEF should be measured in all STEMI patients. (Level of
Evidence: B)
Assessment of LV function after STEMI has been shown to be one of
the most accurate predictors of future cardiac events in both
the prereperfusion176 and the reperfusion
eras.177,178
Multiple techniques for assessing LV function of patients after
STEMI have important prognostic value. Because of the dynamic
nature of LV function recovery after STEMI, clinicians should
consider the timing of the imaging study relative to the index
event when assessing LV function. (See Table 6 of the ACC/AHA/ASE
2003 Guideline Update on the Clinical Application of
Echocardiography for further discussion of the impact of timing
on assessment of LV function and inducible
ischemia.)153
e. Invasive Evaluation
Class I
-
1. Coronary arteriography should be performed in patients with
spontaneous episodes of myocardial ischemia or episodes of
myocardial ischemia provoked by minimal exertion during recovery
from STEMI. (Level of Evidence: A)
-
2. Coronary arteriography should be performed for
intermediate- or high-risk findings on noninvasive
testing after STEMI (see Table 23 of the ACC/AHA 2002
Guideline Update for the Management of Patients
With Chronic Stable
Angina).179
(Level of Evidence: B)
-
3. Coronary arteriography should be performed if the patient
is sufficiently stable before definitive therapy of a
mechanical complication of STEMI, such as acute MR,
VSR, pseudoaneurysm, or LV aneurysm. (Level of Evidence:
B)
-
4. Coronary arteriography should be performed in patients
with persistent hemodynamic instability. (Level of
Evidence: B)
-
5. Coronary arteriography should be performed in survivors
of STEMI who had clinical heart failure during the acute
episode but subsequently demonstrated well-preserved LV function.
(Level of Evidence: C)
Class IIa
-
1. It is reasonable to perform coronary arteriography when STEMI
is suspected to have occurred by a mechanism other than thrombotic
occlusion of an atherosclerotic plaque. This would include coronary
embolism, certain metabolic or hematological diseases, or coronary
artery spasm. (Level of Evidence: C)
-
2. Coronary arteriography is reasonable in STEMI patients
with any of the following: diabetes mellitus, LVEF
less than 0.40, CHF, prior revascularization, or
life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias. (Level of
Evidence: C)
Class IIb
-
1. Catheterization and revascularization may be considered as
part of a strategy of routine coronary arteriography for risk
assessment after fibrinolytic therapy (See Section
6.3.1.6.4.7 of the full-text guidelines).
(Level of Evidence: B)
Class III
-
1. Coronary arteriography should not be performed in survivors of
STEMI who are thought not to be candidates for coronary revascularization.
(Level of Evidence: A)
The Writing Committee encourages contemporary research into the
benefit of routine catheterization versus watchful waiting after
fibrinolytic therapy in the contemporary
era.180 (See Section
6.3.1.6.4.7 of the full-text guidelines)
f. Assessment of Ventricular
Arrhythmias
Class IIb
-
1. Noninvasive assessment of the risk of ventricular arrhythmias
may be considered (including signal-averaged ECG, 24-hour ambulatory
monitoring, heart rate variability, micro T-wave alternans,
and T-wave variability) in patients recovering from STEMI.
(Level of Evidence: B)
The clinical applicability of these tests to the post-STEMI patient
is in a state of evolution. Until these issues are resolved, use
these tests are used only to support routine management and risk
assessment.
L. Secondary Prevention
Class I
-
1. Patients who survive the acute phase of STEMI should have
plans initiated for secondary prevention therapies. (Level of
Evidence: A)
Secondary prevention therapies, unless contraindicated, are an
essential part of the management of all patients with STEMI
(Table
4),181 regardless of
sex.182,183
Inasmuch as atherosclerotic vascular disease is frequently found
in multiple vascular beds, the physician should search for symptoms
or signs of peripheral vascular disease or cerebrovascular disease
in patients presenting with STEMI.
1. Patient Education Before
Discharge
Class I
-
1. Before hospital discharge, all STEMI patients should be educated
about and actively involved in planning for adherence to the
lifestyle changes and drug therapies that are important for
the secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease. (Level of
Evidence: B)
-
2. Post-STEMI patients and their family members should
receive discharge instructions about recognizing acute
cardiac symptoms and appropriate actions to take in
response (ie, calling 9-1-1 if symptoms are unimproved
or worsening 5 minutes after onset, or if symptoms
are unimproved or worsening 5 minutes after 1 sublingual
nitroglycerin dose) to ensure early evaluation and
treatment should symptoms recur. (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
3. Family members of STEMI patients should be advised to
learn about AEDs and CPR and be referred to a CPR training
program. Ideally, such training programs would have a social
support component targeting family members of high-risk patients.
(Level of Evidence: C)
2. Lipid
Management
Class I
-
1. Dietary therapy that is low in saturated fat and cholesterol
(less than 7% of total calories as saturated fat and less than
200 mg/d cholesterol) should be started on discharge after recovery
from STEMI. Increased consumption of the following should be
encouraged: omega3 fatty acids, fruits, vegetables, soluble
(viscous) fiber, and whole grains. Calorie intake should be
balanced with energy output to achieve and maintain a healthy
weight. (Level of Evidence: A)
-
2. A lipid profile should be obtained from past records, but
if not available, it should be performed in all patients
with STEMI, preferably after they have fasted and within
24 hours of admission. (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
3. The target LDL-C level after STEMI should be substantially
less than 100 mg/dL. (Level of Evidence: A) a. Patients with
LDL-C 100 mg/dl or above should be prescribed drug therapy on
hospital discharge, with preference given to statins. (Level
of Evidence: A) b. Patients with LDL-C less than 100 mg/dL or
unknown LDL-C levels should be prescribed statin therapy on
hospital discharge. (Level of Evidence: B)
-
4. Patients with nonhigh-density lipoprotein
cholesterol (non HDL-C) levels less than 130 mg/dL
who have an HDL-C level less than 40 mg/dL should receive
special emphasis on nonpharmacological therapy (eg,
exercise, weight loss, and smoking cessation) to increase
HDL-C. (Level of Evidence: B)
Class IIa
-
1. It is reasonable to prescribe drug therapy at discharge to
patients with nonHDL-C greater than or equal to 130 mg/dL,
with a goal of reducing nonHDL-C to substantially less
than 130 mg/dL. (Level of Evidence: B)
-
2. It is reasonable to prescribe drug therapy such as niacin
or fibrate therapy to raise HDL-C levels in patients with
LDL-C less than 100 mg/dL and nonHDL-C less than
130 mg/dL but HDL-C less than 40 mg/dL despite dietary
and other nonpharmacological therapy. (Level of
Evidence: B) Dietary-supplement niacin must not be
used as a substitute for prescription niacin, and over-the-counter
niacin should be used only if approved and monitored by a
physician.
-
3. It is reasonable to add drug therapy with either niacin
or a fibrate to diet regardless of LDL-C and HDL-C levels
when triglyceride levels are greater than 500 mg/dL. In this
setting, nonHDL-C (goal substantially less than 130 mg/dL)
should be the cholesterol target rather than LDL-C. (Level
of Evidence: B) Dietary-supplement niacin must not be used
as a substitute for prescription niacin, and over-the-counter
niacin should be used only if approved and monitored by a
physician.
Early secondary prevention trials conducted before the use of statin
therapy, which used then-available drugs and diet to lower
cholesterol, demonstrated significant reductions of 25% in nonfatal
MIs and 14% in fatal MIs.14 Subsequently,
a growing body of evidence, mainly from large randomized clinical
trials of statin therapy, has firmly established the desirability
of lowering atherogenic serum lipids in patients who have
recovered from a STEMI. See Table 4 for additional
discussion of recommendations.
3. Weight
Management
Class I
-
1. Measurement of waist circumference and calculation of body
mass index are recommended. Desirable body mass index range is
18.5 to 24.9 kg/m2. A waist circumference greater than 40
inches in men and 35 inches in women would result in evaluation
for metabolic syndrome and implementation of weight-reduction
strategies. (Level of Evidence: B)
-
2. Patients should be advised about appropriate strategies
for weight management and physical activity (usually
accomplished in conjunction with cardiac rehabilitation).
(Level of Evidence: B)
-
3. A plan should be established to monitor the response of
body mass index and waist circumference to therapy
(usually accomplished in conjunction with cardiac
rehabilitation). (Level of Evidence: B)
4. Smoking
Cessation
Class I
-
1. Patients recovering from STEMI who have a history of cigarette
smoking should be strongly encouraged to stop smoking and to
avoid secondhand smoke. Counseling should be provided to the
patient and family, along with pharmacological therapy (including
nicotine replacement and bupropion) and formal smoking-cessation
programs as appropriate. (Level of Evidence: B)
-
2. All STEMI patients should be assessed for a history of
cigarette smoking. (Level of Evidence:
A)
5. Antiplatelet
Therapy
Class I
-
1. A daily dose of aspirin 75 to 162 mg orally should be given
indefinitely to patients recovering from STEMI. (Level of
Evidence: A)
-
2. If true aspirin allergy is present, preferably clopidogrel (75
mg orally per day) or, alternatively, ticlopidine (250 mg orally
twice daily) should be substituted. (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
3. If true aspirin allergy is present, warfarin therapy
with a target INR of 2.5 to 3.5 is a useful alternative
to clopidogrel in patients less than 75 years of age who are at
low risk for bleeding and who can be monitored adequately for
dose adjustment to maintain a target INR range. (Level of Evidence:
C)
Class III
-
1. Ibuprofen should not be used because it blocks the antiplatelet
effects of aspirin. (Level of Evidence: C)
On the basis of 12 randomized trials in 18 788 patients with prior
infarction, the Antiplatelet Trialists Collaboration reported
a 25% reduction in the risk of recurrent infarction, stroke, or
vascular death in patients receiving prolonged antiplatelet therapy
(36 fewer events for every 1000 patients
treated).31 No antiplatelet
therapy has proved superior to aspirin in this population, and
daily doses of aspirin between 80 and 325 mg appear to be
effective.184 The CAPRIE (Clopidogrel
versus Aspirin in Patients at Risk of Ischemic Events) trial,
which compared aspirin with clopidogrel in 19 185 patients at
high risk for vascular events, demonstrated a modest but significant
(8.6%, P equals 0.043) reduction in serious vascular events
with clopidogrel compared with
aspirin.185 These data suggest clopidogrel
as the best alternative to aspirin in patients with true
aspirin allergy.
The use of warfarin therapy for secondary prevention of vascular
events in patients after STEMI is discussed in Section 7.12.11
of the full-text guidelines. Large randomized trials have
demonstrated that oral anticoagulants, when given in adequate
doses, reduce the rates of adverse outcomes, at the cost of a
small increase in hemorrhagic
events.186188 In the Warfarin, Aspirin, Reinfarction
Study (WARIS II), warfarin without aspirin in a dose intended
to achieve an INR of 2.8 to 4.2 resulted in a significant reduction
in a composite end point (death, nonfatal reinfarction, or
thromboembolic stroke) compared with therapy with aspirin alone
(16.7% versus 20.0%).186 Warfarin
therapy resulted in a small but significant increase in major,
nonfatal bleeding compared with therapy with aspirin alone (0.62%
versus 0.17% per year). Chronic therapy with warfarin after STEMI
presents an alternative to clopidogrel in patients with aspirin
allergy.
6. Inhibition of Renin-Angiotensin-
Aldosterone-System
Class I
-
1. An ACE inhibitor should be prescribed at discharge for all
patients without contraindications after STEMI. (Level of
Evidence: A)
-
2. Long-term aldosterone blockade should be prescribed for
post-STEMI patients without significant renal dysfunction
(creatinine should be less than or equal to 2.5 mg/dL in
men and less than or equal to 2.0 mg/dL in women) or
hyperkalemia (potassium should be less than or equal
to 5.0 mEq/L) who are already receiving therapeutic doses
of an ACE inhibitor, have an LVEF less than or equal to
0.40, and have either symptomatic heart failure or
diabetes. (Level of Evidence: A)
-
3. An ARB should be prescribed at discharge in those STEMI
patients who are intolerant of an ACE inhibitor and
have either clinical or radiological signs of heart failure and
LVEF less than 0.40. Valsartan and candesartan have established
efficacy for this recommendation. (Level of Evidence:
B)
Class IIa
-
1. In STEMI patients who tolerate ACE inhibitors, an ARB can be
useful as an alternative to ACE inhibitors in the long-term
management of STEMI patients, provided there are either clinical
or radiological signs of heart failure or LVEF less than 0.40.
Valsartan and candesartan have established efficacy for this
recommendation. (Level of Evidence: B)
Class IIb
-
1. The combination of an ACE inhibitor and an ARB may be considered
in the long-term management of STEMI patients with persistent
symptomatic heart failure and LVEF less than 0.40. (Level of
Evidence: B)
The use of ACE inhibitors early in the acute phase of STEMI and
in the hospital management phase has been described earlier.
Compelling evidence now supports the broad long-term use of ACE
inhibitors after
STEMI.189,190
The results of the VALIANT study (Valsartan in Acute Myocardial
Infarction Trial) evaluating valsartan are discussed in Section
7.4.3 of the full-text guidelines. The series of CHARM studies
(Candesartan in Heart Failure Assessment in Reduction of Mortality),
although focusing on the evaluation of candesartan in patients
with chronic heart failure, provides information that can be
extrapolated to the long-term management of the STEMI patient,
because 50% to 60% of the patients studied had ischemic heart
disease as the cause of heart
failure.191193
Given the extensive randomized trial and routine clinical experience
with ACE inhibitors, they remain the logical first agent for
inhibition of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system in the
long-term management of patients with
STEMI.150,194
The ARBs valsartan and candesartan should be administered over
the long term to STEMI patients with symptomatic heart failure
who are intolerant of ACE inhibitors. As described in Section
7.4.3 of the full-text guidelines, the choice between an ACE
inhibitor and an ARB over the long term in patients who are tolerant
of ACE inhibitors will vary with individual physician and
patient preference, as well as cost and anticipated side-effect
profile.150,194
The results of the most relevant clinical trials that tested
combinations of ACE inhibitors and ARBs have been subtly different,
but clinically relevant. Whereas the
CHARM-Added192 trial demonstrated
a reduction in the combined end point of heart failure
hospitalization and death over ACE inhibition alone, the VALIANT
study149 reported that the
combination of captopril and valsartan was equivalent to either
alone, but with a greater number of adverse effects. Thus, when
combination ACE inhibition and angiotensin receptor blockade is
considered necessary, the preferred ARB is candesartan. Although
there is evidence that the combination of an ACE inhibitor and
an aldosterone inhibitor is effective at reducing mortality and
is well tolerated in patients with a serum creatinine level of
2.5 mg/dL or less and a serum potassium concentration of 5.0 mEq/L
or less (see Section 7.4.3 of the full-text guidelines), much
less experience exists with the combination of an ARB and
aldosterone inhibitor (24% of 2028 patients in the CHARM-Alternative
trial)191 and the triple combination
of an ACE inhibitor, ARB, and an aldosterone antagonist (17% of
2548 patients in the CHARM-Added
trial).192
The combination of an ACE inhibitor and an ARB (valsartan 20 mg/d
orally initially; titrated up to 160 mg orally twice per day,
or candesartan 4 to 8 mg/d orally initially; titrated up to 32
mg/d orally) or an ACE inhibitor and an aldosterone inhibitor may
be considered for the long-term management of STEMI patients with
symptomatic heart failure and LVEF less than 0.40, provided the
serum creatinine level is less than or equal to 2.5 mg/dL in men
and less than or equal to 2.0 mg/dL in women and the serum potassium
concentration is less than or equal to 5.0 mEq/L (See Sections
7.4.3 and 7.6.4 of the full-text guidelines.)
7.
Beta-Blockers
Class I
-
1. All patients after STEMI except those at low risk (normal or
near-normal ventricular function, successful reperfusion, and
absence of significant ventricular arrhythmias) and those with
contraindications should receive beta-blocker therapy. Treatment
should begin within a few days of the event, if not initiated
acutely, and continue indefinitely. (Level of Evidence:
A)
-
2. Patients with moderate or severe LV failure should receive
beta-blocker therapy with a gradual titration scheme. (Level
of Evidence: B)
Class IIa
-
1. It is reasonable to prescribe beta-blockers to low-risk patients
after STEMI who have no contraindications to that class of
medications. (Level of Evidence: A)
The use of beta-blockers in the early phase of STEMI and in hospital
management is reviewed in Sections
6.3.1.6 and 7.4.1 of the full-text guidelines. The
benefits of beta-blocker therapy in patients without contraindications
have been demonstrated with or without reperfusion, initiated
early or later in the clinical course, and for all age groups.
The benefits of beta-blocker therapy for secondary prevention
are well
established.142,196
In patients with moderate or severe LV failure, beta-blocker
therapy should be administered with a gradual titration
scheme.197 Long-term
beta-blocker therapy should be administered to survivors of STEMI
who have subsequently undergone revascularization, because there
is evidence of a mortality benefit from their use despite
revascularization with either CABG surgery or
PCI.198
8. Blood Pressure
Control
Class I
-
1. Blood pressure should be treated with drug therapy to a target
level of less than 140/90 mm Hg and to less than 130/80 mm Hg
for patients with diabetes or chronic kidney disease. (Level
of Evidence: B)
-
2. Lifestyle modification (weight control, dietary changes,
physical activity, and sodium restriction) should be
initiated in all patients with blood pressure greater
than or equal to 120/80 mm Hg. (Level of Evidence:
B)
Class IIb
-
1. A target blood pressure goal of 120/80 mm Hg for post-STEMI
patients may be reasonable. (Level of Evidence: C)
Class III
-
1. Short-acting dihydropyridine calcium channel blocking agents
should not be used for the treatment of hypertension. (Level
of Evidence: B)
The Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention,
Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure
(JNC-7)199 recommends that patients
be treated after MI with ACE inhibitors, beta-blockers, and, if
necessary, aldosterone antagonists to a target blood pressure
of less than 140/90 mm Hg, or less than 130/80 mm Hg for those
with chronic kidney disease or
diabetes.199 Most patients will require
2 or more drugs to reach this goal, and when the blood pressure
is greater than 20/10 mm Hg above goal, 2 drugs should usually
be used from the outset.
JNC-7 emphasizes the importance of lifestyle modifications for all
patients with blood pressure of 120/80 mm Hg or
greater.199 These modifications
include weight reduction if overweight or obese, consumption of
a diet rich in fruits and vegetables and low in total fat and
saturated fat, and reduction of sodium to no more than 2.4
g/d.199
9. Diabetes
Management
Class I
-
1. Hypoglycemic therapy should be initiated to achieve HbA1c less
than 7%. (Level of Evidence: B)
Class III
-
1. Thiazolidinediones should not be used in patients recovering
from STEMI who have New York Heart Association class III or IV
heart failure. (Level of Evidence: B)
10. Hormone
Therapy
Class III
-
1. Hormone therapy with estrogen plus progestin should not be
given de novo to postmenopausal women after STEMI for secondary
prevention of coronary events. (Level of Evidence: A)
-
2. Postmenopausal women who are already taking estrogen plus
progestin at the time of a STEMI should not continue
hormone therapy. However, women who are beyond 1 to
2 years after initiation of hormone therapy who wish
to continue hormone therapy for another compelling
indication should weigh the risks and benefits,
recognizing a greater risk of cardiovascular events.
However, hormone therapy should not be continued while
patients are on bedrest in the hospital. (Level
of Evidence: B)
On the basis of the Heart and Estrogen/progestin Replacement Study
(HERS),200 the Heart and Estrogen/progestin
Replacement Study Follow-up
(HERS-2),201 and the Womens Health
Initiative,202 postmenopausal
women should not receive combination estrogen and progestin therapy
for primary or secondary prevention of CHD. It is recommended
that the use of hormone therapy be discontinued in women who have
STEMI.200202
11. Warfarin
Therapy
Class I
-
1. Warfarin should be given to aspirin-allergic post-STEMI patients
with indications for anticoagulation as follows:
-
a. Without stent implanted (INR 2.5 to
3.5). (Level of Evidence: B)
-
b. With stent implanted and clopidogrel
75 mg/d administered concurrently (INR 2.0 to 3.0). (Level
of Evidence: C)
-
2. Warfarin (INR 2.5 to 3.5) is a useful alternative to
clopidogrel in aspirin-allergic patients after STEMI who
do not have a stent implanted. (Level of Evidence:
B)
-
3. Warfarin (INR 2.0 to 3.0) should be prescribed for
post-STEMI patients with either persistent or paroxysmal
atrial fibrillation. (Level of Evidence:
A)
-
4. In post-STEMI patients with LV thrombus noted on an
imaging study, warfarin should be prescribed for at
least 3 months (Level of Evidence: B) and indefinitely
in patients without an increased risk of bleeding
(Level of Evidence: C).
-
5. Warfarin alone (INR 2.5 to 3.5) or warfarin (INR 2.0 to
3.0) in combination with aspirin (75 to 162 mg) should be
prescribed in post-STEMI patients who have no stent
implanted and who have indications for anticoagulation.
(Level of Evidence: B)
Class IIa
-
1. In post-STEMI patients less than 75 years of age without
specific indications for anticoagulation who can have their
level of anticoagulation monitored reliably, warfarin alone
(INR 2.5 to 3.5) or warfarin (INR 2.0 to 3.0) in combination
with aspirin (75 to 162 mg) can be useful for secondary prevention.
(Level of Evidence: B)
-
2. It is reasonable to prescribe warfarin to post-STEMI
patients with LV dysfunction and extensive regional
wall-motion abnormalities. (Level of Evidence:
A)
Class IIb
-
1. Warfarin may be considered in patients with severe LV dysfunction,
with or without CHF. (Level of Evidence: C)
The indications for long-term anticoagulation after STEMI remain
controversial and are evolving. Although the use of warfarin
has been demonstrated to be cost-effective compared with standard
therapy without aspirin, the superior safety, efficacy and
cost-effectiveness of aspirin has made it the antithrombotic agent
of choice for secondary
prevention203
(Figure 7).
12. Physical
Activity
Class I
-
1. On the basis of assessment of risk, ideally with an exercise
test to guide the prescription, all patients recovering from
STEMI should be encouraged to exercise for a minimum of 30 minutes,
preferably daily but at least 3 or 4 times per week (walking,
jogging, cycling, or other aerobic activity), supplemented by
an increase in daily lifestyle activities (eg, walking breaks
at work, gardening, and household work). (Level of Evidence:
B)
-
2. Cardiac rehabilitation/secondary prevention programs,
when available, are recommended for patients with STEMI,
particularly those with multiple modifiable risk factors and/or
those moderate- to high-risk patients in whom supervised exercise
training is warranted. (Level of Evidence: C)
13. Antioxidants
Class III
-
1. Antioxidant vitamins such as vitamin E and/or vitamin C supplements
should not be prescribed to patients recovering from STEMI to
prevent cardiovascular disease. (Level of Evidence:
A)
There is no convincing evidence to support lipid- or water-soluble
antioxidant supplementation in patients after STEMI or patients
with or without established coronary disease.
 |
VIII. Long-Term Management |
A. Psychosocial Impact of STEMI
Class I
-
1. The psychosocial status of the patient should be evaluated,
including inquiries regarding symptoms of depression, anxiety,
or sleep disorders and the social support environment. (Level
of Evidence: C)
Class IIa
-
1. Treatment with cognitive-behavioral therapy and selective
serotonin reuptake inhibitors can be useful for STEMI patients
with depression that occurs in the year after hospital discharge.
(Level of Evidence: A)
Treatment of depression with combined cognitive-behavioral therapy
and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors improves outcome
in terms of depression symptoms and social
function.204206 It appears prudent to assess STEMI patients
for depression during hospitalization and during the first month
after STEMI and to intervene and reassess yearly in the first
5 years, as appropriate. There is evidence that the STEMI experience,
with its sudden and unexpected onset, dramatic changes in lifestyle,
and the additive effort of comorbid life events, is a relatively
traumatic event and may produce impaired coping during subsequent
ischemic
events.207
B. Cardiac Rehabilitation
Class II
-
1. Cardiac rehabilitation/secondary prevention programs, when
available, are recommended for patients with STEMI, particularly
those with multiple modifiable risk factors and/or those moderate-
to high-risk patients in whom supervised exercise training is
warranted. (Level of Evidence: C)
C. Follow-Up Visit With Medical Provider
Class I
-
1. A follow-up visit should delineate the presence or absence of
cardiovascular symptoms and functional class. (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
2. The patients list of current medications should
be reevaluated in a follow-up visit, and appropriate
titration of ACE inhibitors, beta-blockers, and statins should
be undertaken. (Level of Evidence: C)
-
3. The predischarge risk assessment and planned workup
should be reviewed and continued (Figure
6). This should include a check of LV function
and possibly Holter monitoring for those patients whose
early post-STEMI ejection fraction was 0.31 to 0.40
or lower, in consideration of possible ICD use
(Figure 5). (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
4. The healthcare provider should review and emphasize the
principles of secondary prevention with the patient and family
members (Table
4).181 (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
5. The psychosocial status of the patient should be
evaluated in follow-up, including inquiries regarding
symptoms of depression, anxiety, or sleep disorders and
the social support environment. (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
6. In a follow-up visit, the healthcare provider should
discuss in detail issues of physical activity, return to work,
resumption of sexual activity, and travel, including driving and
flying. The metabolic equivalent values for various activities
are provided as a resource in Table 34 of the full-text guideline.
(Level of Evidence: C)
-
7. Patients and their families should be asked if they are
interested in CPR training after the patient is
discharged from the hospital. (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
8. Providers should actively review the following issues
with patients and their families:
-
a. The patients heart attack risk.
(Level of Evidence: C)
-
b. How to recognize symptoms of STEMI.
(Level of Evidence: C)
-
c. The advisability of calling 9-1-1 if
symptoms are unimproved or worsening after 5 minutes,
despite feelings of uncertainty about the symptoms
and fear of potential embarrassment. (Level of Evidence:
C)
-
d. A plan for appropriate recognition and
response to a potential acute cardiac event, including the
phone number to access EMS, generally
9-1-1.15 (Level
of Evidence: C)
-
9. Cardiac rehabilitation/secondary prevention programs,
when available, are recommended for patients with STEMI,
particularly those with multiple modifiable risk factors
and/or those moderate- to high-risk patients in whom
supervised exercise training is warranted. (Level of
Evidence: C)
 |
Footnotes |
This document was approved by the American College
of Cardiology Foundation Board of Trustees on May 7, 2004 and
by the American Heart Association Science Advisory and Coordinating
Committee on May 5, 2004.
The ACC/AHA Task Force on Practice Guidelines
makes every effort to avoid any actual or potential conflicts
of interest that might arise as a result of an outside relationship
or personal interest of a member of the writing panel. Specifically,
all members of the writing panel are asked to provide
disclosure statements of all such relationships that might be
perceived as real or potential conflicts of interest. These
statements are reviewed by the parent task force, reported orally
to all members of the writing panel at the first meeting, and
updated as changes occur. The relationship with industry
information for the writing committee members is posted on the
ACC and AHA World Wide Web sites with the full-length version
of the update, along with the names and relationships with industry
of the peer reviewers.
When citing this document, the American College
of Cardiology Foundation and the American Heart Association would
appreciate the following citation format: Antman EM, Anbe DT,
Armstrong PW, Bates ER, Green LA, Hand M, Hochman JS, Krumholz
HM, Kushner FG, Lamas GA, Mullany CJ, Ornato JP, Pearle DL, Sloan
MA, Smith SC Jr. ACC/AHA guidelines for the management of patients
with ST-elevation myocardial infarction: executive summary: a
report of the ACC/AHA Task Force on Practice Guidelines
(Committee to Revise the 1999 Guidelines on the Management of
Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction). Circulation.
2004;110:588636.
Copies: This document and the full-text
guideline are available on the World Wide Web sites of the American
College of Cardiology
(www.acc.org), the American Heart
Association
(www.americanheart.org),
and the Canadian Cardiovascular Society
(www.ccs.ca). Single copies of
this executive summary, published in the August 4, 2004 issue
of the Journal of the American College of Cardiology or
the August 3, 2004 issue of Circulation or the companion
full-text guideline are available for $10.00 each by calling
1-800-253-4636 or writing to the American College of Cardiology
Foundation, Resource Center, 9111 Old Georgetown Road, Bethesda,
MD 20814-1699. To purchase bulk reprints (specify version and
reprint number: 71-0294 for the executive summary; 71-0293 for
the full-text guideline): up to 999 copies, call 1-800-611-6083
(US only) or fax 413-665-2671; 1000 or more copies, call
214-706-1789, fax 214-691-6342, or e-mail
pubauth@heart.org.
 |
References |
-
-
Mehta RH, Montoye CK, Gallogly M, et al., for the GAP Steering Committee
of the American College of Cardiology. Improving quality of care for acute
myocardial infarction: The Guidelines Applied in Practice (GAP) Initiative.
JAMA. 2002; 287:
12691276.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Jencks SF, Huff ED, Cuerdon T. Change in the quality of care delivered to
medicare beneficiaries, 19981999 to 20002001. JAMA. 2003;
289:
305312.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Schneider EC, Zaslavsky AM, Epstein AM. Racial disparities in the quality
of care for enrollees in medicare managed care. JAMA. 2002; 287:
12881294.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Rogers WJ, Canto JG, Lambrew CT, et al. Temporal trends in the treatment
of over 1.5 million patients with myocardial infarction in the US from 1990
through 1999: the National Registry of Myocardial Infarction 1, 2 and 3.
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2000; 36:
20562063.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
American Heart Association. Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics2004
Update. Dallas, TX: American Heart Association
2003.
-
Wiviott SD, Morrow DA, Giugliano RP, et al. Performance of the thrombolysis
in myocardial infarction risk index for early acute coronary syndrome in
the National Registry of Myocardial Infarction: a simple risk index predicts
mortality in both ST and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction. J Am
Coll Cardiol. 2003; 41:
365A366A.
-
Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol
in Adults. Executive Summary of the Third Report of the National Cholesterol
Education Program (NCEP) Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment
of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults (Adult Treatment Panel III). JAMA.
2001; 285:
24862497.[Free
Full Text]
-
Levey AS, Coresh J, Balk E, et al. National Kidney Foundation practice guidelines
for chronic kidney disease: evaluation, classification, and stratification.
Ann Intern Med. 2003; 139:
137147.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
National, Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Act in Time to Heart Attack.
Available at:
http://:www.nhlbi.nih.gov/actintime,
2003. Accessed May 15,
2003.
-
American College of Cardiology. Guidelines Applied in Practice. Available
at:
http://www.acc.org/gap/gap.htm.
Accessed May 15,
2003.
-
American Heart Association. Get With the Guidelines. Available at
http://www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=1165.
Accessed May 15,
2003.
-
Topol EJ, Kereiakes DJ. Regionalization of care for acute ischemic heart
disease: a call for specialized centers. Circulation. 2003; 107:
14631466.[Free
Full Text]
-
Califf RM, Faxon DP. Need for centers to care for patients with acute coronary
syndromes. Circulation. 2003; 107:
14671470.[Free
Full Text]
-
Willerson JT. Editors commentary: centers of excellence. Circulation.
2003; 107:
14711472.[Free
Full Text]
-
National Cholesterol Education Program. Third Report of the Expert Panel
on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults
(Adult Treatment Panel III). NIH publication No. 025125. Bethesda,
Md: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, 2002. Guidelines, Related
Tools, and Patient Information, available at:
http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/guidelines/cholesterol/index.htm.
Accessed April 12,
2003.
-
Dracup K, Alonzo AA, Atkins JM, et al. The physicians role in minimizing
prehospital delay in patients at high risk for acute myocardial infarction:
recommendations from the National Heart Attack Alert Program. Working Group
on Educational Strategies to Prevent Prehospital Delay in Patients at High
Risk for Acute Myocardial Infarction. Ann Intern Med. 1997; 126:
645651.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Hedges JR, Feldman HA, Bittner V, et al, for the REACT Study Group. Impact
of community intervention to reduce patient delay time on use of reperfusion
therapy for acute myocardial infarction: Rapid Early Action for Coronary
Treatment (REACT) trial. Acad Emerg Med. 2000; 7:
862872.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Canto JG, Zalenski RJ, Ornato JP, et al, for the National Registry of Myocardial
Infarction 2 Investigators. Use of emergency medical services in acute myocardial
infarction and subsequent quality of care: observations from the National
Registry of Myocardial Infarction 2. Circulation. 2002; 106:
30183023.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Goldberg R, Goff D, Cooper L, et al. Age and sex differences in presentation
of symptoms among patients with acute coronary disease: the Trial: Rapid
Early Action for Coronary Treatment (REACT). Coron Artery Dis. 2000;
11:
399407.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Hutchings CB, Mann NC, Daya M, et al, for the Rapid Early Action for Coronary
Treatment Study. Patients with chest pain calling 9-1-1 or self-transporting
to reach definitive care: which mode is quicker? Am Heart J. 2004;
147:
3541.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Faxon D, Lenfant C. Timing is everything: motivating patients to call
911 at onset of acute myocardial infarction. Circulation.
2001; 104:
12101211.[Free
Full Text]
-
US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National
Institutes of Health, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. NIH publication
No. 013313. September 2001. Available at:
http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/prof/heart/mi/provider.pdf.
Accessed December 16,
2002.
-
Eisenberg MJ, Topol EJ. Prehospital administration of aspirin in patients
with unstable angina and acute myocardial infarction. Arch Intern Med.
1996; 156:
15061510.[Abstract]
-
Fibrinolytic Therapy Trialists (FTT) Collaborative Group. Indications
for fibrinolytic therapy in suspected acute myocardial infarction: collaborative
overview of early mortality and major morbidity results from all randomised
trials of more than 1000 patients. Lancet. 1994; 343:
311322.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Streptochinasi nellInfarto Miocardico
(GISSI). Effectiveness of intravenous thrombolytic treatment in acute myocardial
infarction. Lancet. 1986; 1:
397402.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Armstrong PW, Collen D, Antman E. Fibrinolysis for acute myocardial infarction:
the future is here and now. Circulation. 2003; 107:
25332537.[Free
Full Text]
-
The American Heart Association in collaboration with the International Liaison
Committee on Resuscitation. Guidelines 2000 for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation
and Emergency Cardiovascular Care: Part 7: the era of reperfusion: section
1: acute coronary syndromes (acute myocardial infarction). Circulation.
2000; 102 (suppl I):
I-172I-203.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Pedley DK, Bissett K, Connolly EM, et al. Prospective observational cohort
study of time saved by prehospital thrombolysis for ST elevation myocardial
infarction delivered by paramedics. BMJ. 2003; 327:
2226.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Menown IB, Mackenzie G, Adgey AA. Optimizing the initial 12-lead
electrocardiographic diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction. Eur Heart
J. 2000; 21:
275283.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Case definitions for acute coronary heart disease in epidemiology and clinical
research studies: a statement from the AHA Council on Epidemiology and
Prevention; AHA Statistics Committee; World Heart Federation Council on
Epidemiology and Prevention; the European Society of Cardiology Working Group
on Epidemiology and Prevention; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention;
and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Circulation. 2003;
108:
25432549.[Free
Full Text]
-
Come PC, Pitt B. Nitroglycerin-induced severe hypotension and bradycardia
in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Circulation. 1976;
54:
624628.[Abstract]
-
Antithrombotic Trialists Collaboration. Collaborative meta-analysis
of randomised trials of antiplatelet therapy for prevention of death, myocardial
infarction, and stroke in high risk patients. BMJ. 2002; 324:
7186.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Sagar KA, Smyth MR. A comparative bioavailability study of different aspirin
formulations using on-line multidimensional chromatography. J Pharm Biomed
Anal. 1999; 21:
383392.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
De Luca G, Suryapranata H, Zijlstra F, et al, for the ZWOLLE Myocardial
Infarction Study Group. Symptom-onset-to-balloon time and mortality in patients
with acute myocardial infarction treated by primary angioplasty. J Am
Coll Cardiol. 2003; 42:
991997.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Boersma E, Mercado N, Poldermans D, et al. Acute myocardial infarction.
Lancet. 2003; 361:
847858.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
De Luca G, Suryapranata H, Ottervanger JP, et al. Time delay to treatment
and mortality in primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction: every
minute of delay counts. Circulation. 2004; 109:
12231225.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Boersma E, Maas AC, Deckers JW, et al. Early thrombolytic treatment in acute
myocardial infarction: reappraisal of the golden hour. Lancet. 1996;
348:
771775.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Zeymer U, Tebbe U, Essen R, et al, for the ALKK-Study Group. Influence of
time to treatment on early infarct-related artery patency after different
thrombolytic regimens. Am Heart J. 1999; 137:
3438.[Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Weaver WD, Cerqueira M, Hallstrom AP, et al. Prehospital-initiated vs
hospital-initiated thrombolytic therapy: the Myocardial Infarction Triage
and Intervention Trial. JAMA. 1993; 270:
12111216.[Abstract]
-
Brodie BR, Stuckey TD, Wall TC, et al. Importance of time to reperfusion
for 30-day and late survival and recovery of left ventricular function after
primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol.
1998; 32:
13121319.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Brodie BR, Stuckey TD, Wall TC, et al. Importance of time to reperfusion
on outcomes with primary coronary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction
(results from the Stent Primary Angioplasty in Myocardial Infarction Trial).
Am J Cardiol. 2001; 88:
10851090.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Williams DO. Treatment delayed is treatment denied. Circulation.
2004; 109:
18061808.[Free
Full Text]
-
The Task Force on the Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction of the European
Society of Cardiology. Management of acute myocardial infarction in patients
presenting with ST-segment elevation. Eur Heart J. 2003; 24:
2866.[Free
Full Text]
-
Morrow DA, Antman EM, Charlesworth A, et al. TIMI risk score for ST-elevation
myocardial infarction: a convenient, bedside, clinical score for risk assessment
at presentation: an intravenous nPA for treatment of infarcting myocardium
early II trial substudy. Circulation. 2000; 102:
20312037.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Lee KL, Woodlief LH, Topol EJ, et al, for the GUSTO-I Investigators. Predictors
of 30-day mortality in the era of reperfusion for acute myocardial infarction:
results from an international trial of 41,021 patients. Circulation.
1995; 91:
16591668.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Morrow DA, Antman EM, Giugliano RP, et al. A simple risk index for rapid
initial triage of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction: an InTIME
II substudy. Lancet. 2001; 358:
15711575.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Krumholz HM, Chen J, Wang Y, et al. Comparing AMI mortality among hospitals
in patients 65 years of age and older: evaluating methods of risk adjustment.
Circulation. 1999; 99:
29862992.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Granger CB, Goldberg RJ, Dabbous O, et al, for the Global Registry of Acute
Coronary Events Investigators. Predictors of hospital mortality in the Global
Registry of Acute Coronary Events. Arch Intern Med. 2003; 163:
23452353.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Magid DJ, Calonge BN, Rumsfeld JS, et al, for the National Registry of Myocardial
Infarction 2 and 3 Investigators. Relation between hospital primary angioplasty
volume and mortality for patients with acute MI treated with primary angioplasty
vs thrombolytic therapy. JAMA. 2000; 284:
31313138.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Nallamothu BK, Bates ER. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus fibrinolytic
therapy in acute myocardial infarction: is timing (almost) everything? Am
J Cardiol. 2003; 92:
824826.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Bonnefoy E, Lapostolle F, Leizorovicz A, et al., for the Comparison of
Angioplasty and Prehospital Thrombolysis in Acute Myocardial Infarction study
group. Primary angioplasty versus prehospital fibrinolysis in acute myocardial
infarction: a randomised study. Lancet. 2002; 360:
825829.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Steg PG, 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:
28512856.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
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:
94104.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Deleted in press.
-
Antman EM. General hospital management. In: Julian DG, Braunwald E, eds.
Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction. London, England: WB Saunders 1994;
4244.
-
Lincoff AM, Califf RM, Van de Werf F, et al, for the Global Use of Strategies
To Open Coronary Arteries (GUSTO) Investigators. Mortality at 1 year with
combination platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibition and reduced-dose
fibrinolytic therapy vs conventional fibrinolytic therapy for acute myocardial
infarction: GUSTO V randomized trial. JAMA. 2002; 288:
21302135.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Zijlstra F, Beukema WP, vant Hof AW, et al. Randomized comparison of
primary coronary angioplasty with thrombolytic therapy in low risk patients
with acute myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1997; 29:
908912.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Ribeiro EE, Silva LA, Carneiro R, et al. Randomized trial of direct coronary
angioplasty versus intravenous streptokinase in acute myocardial infarction.
J Am Coll Cardiol. 1993; 22:
376380.[Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Grinfield L, Berrocal D, Bellardi J, et al. Fibrinolytics versus primary
angioplasty in acute myocardial infarction (FAP): a randomized trial in a
community hospital in Argentina. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1996; 27: A222.
Abstract.
-
Zijlstra F, de Boer MJ, Hoorntje JC, et al. A comparison of immediate coronary
angioplasty with intravenous streptokinase in acute myocardial infarction.
N Engl J Med. 1993; 328:
680684.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Widimsky P, Groch L, Zelízko M, et al. 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:
823831.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
de Boer MJ, Ottervanger JP, vant Hof AW, et al, for the Zwolle Myocardial
Infarction Study Group. Reperfusion therapy in elderly patients with acute
myocardial infarction: a randomized comparison of primary angioplasty and
thrombolytic therapy. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002; 39:
17231728.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Akhras F, Ousa AA, Swann G, et al. Primary coronary angioplasty or intravenous
thrombolysis for patients with acute myocardial infarction? Acute and late
follow-up results in a new cardiac unit. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1997;
29: A235A236.
Abstract.[CrossRef]
-
Deleted in press.
-
Grines CL, Browne KF, Marco J, et al, for the Primary Angioplasty in Myocardial
Infarction Study Group. A comparison of immediate angioplasty with thrombolytic
therapy for acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 1993; 328:
673679.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Gibbons RJ, Holmes DR, Reeder GS, et al, for the Mayo Coronary Care Unit
and Catheterization Laboratory Groups. Immediate angioplasty compared with
the administration of a thrombolytic agent followed by conservative treatment
for myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 1993; 328:
685691.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Ribichini F, Steffenino G, Dellavalle A, et al. Comparison of thrombolytic
therapy and primary coronary angioplasty with liberal stenting for inferior
myocardial infarction with precordial ST-segment depression: immediate and
long-term results of a randomized study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1998;
32:
16871694.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
García E, Elízaga J, Pérez-Castellano N, et al. Primary
angioplasty versus systemic thrombolysis in anterior myocardial infarction.
J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999; 33:
605611.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
The Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Coronary Arteries in Acute
Coronary Syndromes (GUSTO IIb) Angioplasty Substudy Investigators. A clinical
trial comparing primary coronary angioplasty with tissue plasminogen activator
for acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 1997; 336:
16211628.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Le May MR, Labinaz M, Davies RF, et al. Stenting versus thrombolysis in acute
myocardial infarction trial (STAT). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001; 37:
985991.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Schömig A, Kastrati A, Dirschinger J, et al, for the Stent versus
Thrombolysis for Occluded Coronary Arteries in Patients with Acute Myocardial
Infarction Study Investigators. Coronary stenting plus platelet glycoprotein
IIb/IIIa blockade compared with tissue plasminogen activator in acute myocardial
infarction. N Engl J Med. 2000; 343:
385391.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Vermeer F, Oude Ophuis AJ, vd Berg EJ et al. Prospective randomised comparison
between thrombolysis, rescue PTCA, and primary PTCA in patients with extensive
myocardial infarction admitted to a hospital without PTCA facilities: a safety
and feasibility study. Heart. 1999; 82:
426431.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Kastrati A, Mehilli J, Dirschinger J, et al, for the Stent versus Thrombolysis
for Occluded Coronary Arteries in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction
(STOPAMI-2) Study. Myocardial salvage after coronary stenting plus abciximab
versus fibrinolysis plus abciximab in patients with acute myocardial infarction:
a randomised trial. Lancet. 2002; 359:
920925.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Andersen HR, Nielsen TT, Rasmussen K, et al, for the DANAMI-2 Investigators.
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. 2002; 287:
19431951.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Kastrati A, Mehilli J, Dirschinger J, et al, for the Stent versus Thrombolysis
for Occluded Coronary Arteries in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction
(STOPAMI-2) Study. A randomized trial of transfer for primary angioplasty
versus on-site thrombolysis in patients with high-risk myocardial infarction:
the Air Primary Angioplasty in Myocardial Infarction study. J Am Coll
Cardiol. 2002; 39:
17131719.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Andersen HR, Nielsen TT, Rasmussen K, et al, for the DANAMI-2 Investigators.
A comparison of coronary angioplasty with fibrinolytic therapy in acute
myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 2003; 349:
733742.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Hochman JS, Sleeper LA, Webb JG, et al, for the Should We Emergently
Revascularize Occluded Coronaries for Cardiogenic Shock (SHOCK) Investigators.
Early revascularization in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic
shock. N Engl J Med. 1999; 341:
625634.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Keeley EC, Boura JA, Grines CL. Primary angioplasty versus intravenous
thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction: a quantitative review
of 23 randomised trials. Lancet. 2003; 361:
1320.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Melandri G. The obsession with primary angioplasty. Circulation.
2003; 108:
e1620.[CrossRef]
-
Rogers WJ, Dean LS, Moore PB, et al, for the Alabama Registry of Myocardial
Ischemia Investigators. Comparison of primary angioplasty versus thrombolytic
therapy for acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol. 1994; 74:
111118.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Every NR, Parsons LS, Hlatky M, et al, for the Myocardial Infarction Triage
and Intervention Investigators. A comparison of thrombolytic therapy with
primary coronary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J
Med. 1996; 335:
12531260.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Tiefenbrunn AJ, Chandra NC, French WJ, et al. Clinical experience with primary
percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty compared with alteplase
(recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator) in patients with acute myocardial
infarction: a report from the Second National Registry of Myocardial Infarction
(NRMI-2). J Am Coll Cardiol. 1998; 31:
12401245.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Danchin N, Vaur L, Genès N, et al. Treatment of acute myocardial
infarction by primary coronary angioplasty or intravenous thrombolysis in
the "real world": one-year results from a nationwide French survey.
Circulation. 1999; 99:
26392644.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Berger PB, Ellis SG, Holmes DR, et al. Relationship between delay in performing
direct coronary angioplasty and early clinical outcome in patients with acute
myocardial infarction: results from the Global Use of Strategies To Open
Occluded Arteries in Acute Coronary Syndromes (GUSTO-IIb) trial.
Circulation. 1999; 100:
1420.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Cannon CP, Gibson CM, Lambrew CT, et al. Relationship of symptom-onset-to-balloon
time and door-to-balloon time with mortality in patients undergoing angioplasty
for acute myocardial infarction. JAMA. 2000; 283:
29412947.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Brodie BR, Stuckey TD, Hansen C, et al. Benefit of coronary reperfusion before
intervention on outcomes after primary angioplasty for acute myocardial
infarction. Am J Cardiol. 2000; 85:
1318.[Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Stone GW, Cox D, Garcia E, et al. Normal flow (TIMI-3) before mechanical
reperfusion therapy is an independent determinant of survival in acute myocardial
infarction: analysis from the primary angioplasty in myocardial infarction
trials. Circulation. 2001; 104:
636641.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Clements IP, Christian TF, Higano ST, et al. Residual flow to the infarct
zone as a determinant of infarct size after direct angioplasty. Circulation.
1993; 88:
15271533.[Abstract]
-
Juliard JM, Feldman LJ, Golmard JL, et al. Relation of mortality of primary
angioplasty during acute myocardial infarction to door-to-Thrombolysis In
Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) time. Am J Cardiol. 2003; 91:
14011405.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Cragg DR, Friedman HZ, Bonema JD, et al. Outcome of patients with acute
myocardial infarction who are ineligible for thrombolytic therapy. Ann
Intern Med. 1991; 115:
173177.[Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Brodie BR, Weintraub RA, Stuckey TD, et al. Outcomes of direct coronary
angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction in candidates and non-candidates
for thrombolytic therapy. Am J Cardiol. 1991; 67:
712.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Himbert D, Juliard JM, Steg PG, et al. Primary coronary angioplasty for acute
myocardial infarction with contraindication to thrombolysis. Am J Cardiol.
1993; 71:
377381.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Zahn R, Schuster S, Schiele R, et al, for the Maximal Individual Therapy
in Acute Myocardial Infarction (MITRA) Study Group. Comparison of primary
angioplasty with conservative therapy in patients with acute myocardial
infarction and contraindications for thrombolytic therapy. Cathet Cardiovasc
Interv. 1999; 46:
127133.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Grzybowski M, Clements EA, Parsons L, 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:
18911898.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Lotfi M, Mackie K, Dzavik V, et al. Impact of delays to cardiac surgery after
failed angioplasty and stenting. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004; 43:
337342.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Dehmer GJ, Gantt DS. Coronary intervention at hospitals without on-site cardiac
surgery: are we pushing the envelope too far? J Am Coll Cardiol.
2004; 43:
343345.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Antoniucci D, Santoro GM, Bolognese L, et al. A clinical trial comparing
primary stenting of the infarct-related artery with optimal primary angioplasty
for acute myocardial infarction: results from the Florence Randomized Elective
Stenting in Acute Coronary Occlusions (FRESCO) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol.
1998; 31:
12341239.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Rodríguez A, Bernardi V, Fernández M, et al. In-hospital and
late results of coronary stents versus conventional balloon angioplasty in
acute myocardial infarction: Gianturco-Roubin in Acute Myocardial Infarction
(GRAMI trial). Am J Cardiol. 1998; 81:
12861291.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Suryapranata H, Ottervanger JP, Nibbering E, et al. Long term outcome and
cost-effectiveness of stenting versus balloon angioplasty for acute myocardial
infarction. Heart. 2001; 85:
667671.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Saito S, Hosokawa G, Tanaka S, et al, for the PASTA Trial Investigators.
Primary stent implantation is superior to balloon angioplasty in acute myocardial
infarction: final results of the primary angioplasty versus stent implantation
in acute myocardial infarction (PASTA) trial. Cathet Cardiovasc Interv.
1999; 48:
262268.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Grines CL, Cox DA, Stone GW, et al, for the Stent Primary Angioplasty in
Myocardial Infarction Study Group. Coronary angioplasty with or without stent
implantation for acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 1999;
341:
19491956.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Kawashima A, Ueda K, Nishida Y, et al. Quantitative angiographic analysis
of restenosis of primary stenting using Wiktor stent for acute myocardial
infarction: results from a multicenter randomized PRISAM study. Circulation.
1999; 100 (suppl I): I-856.
Abstract.
-
Maillard L, Hamon M, Khalife K, et al, for the STENTIM-2 Investigators. A
comparison of systematic stenting and conventional balloon angioplasty during
primary percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty for acute myocardial
infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2000; 35:
17291736.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Scheller B, Hennen B, Severin-Kneib S, et al. Long-term follow-up of a randomized
study of primary stenting versus angioplasty in acute myocardial infarction.
Am J Med. 2001; 110:
16.[Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Zhu MM, Feit A, Chadow H, et al. Primary stent implantation compared with
primary balloon angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis
of randomized clinical trials. Am J Cardiol. 2001; 88:
297301.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Stone GW, Grines CL, Cox DA, et al, for the Controlled Abciximab and Device
Investigation to Lower Late Angioplasty Complications (CADILLAC) Investigators.
Comparison of angioplasty with stenting, with or without abciximab, in acute
myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 2002; 346:
957966.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Lemos PA, Saia F, Hofma SH, et al. Short- and long-term clinical benefit
of sirolimus-eluting stents compared to conventional bare stents for patients
with acute myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004; 43:
704708.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Ellis SG, Armstrong P, Betriu A, et al. Facilitated percutaneous coronary
intervention versus primary percutaneous coronary intervention: design and
rationale of the Facilitated Intervention with Enhanced Reperfusion Speed
to Stop Events (FINESSE) trial. Am Heart J. 2004; 147:
E16.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
The TIMI Research Group. Immediate vs delayed catheterization and angioplasty
following thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction: TIMI II A
results. JAMA. 1988; 260:
28492858.[Abstract]
-
Topol EJ, Califf RM, George BS, et al. A randomized trial of immediate versus
delayed elective angioplasty after intravenous tissue plasminogen activator
in acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 1987; 317:
581588.[Abstract]
-
Sadanandan S, Buller C, Menon V, et al. The late open artery hypothesis:
a decade later. Am Heart J. 2001; 142:
411421.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Hochman JS, Sleeper LA, White HD, et al, for the SHOCK Investigators: Should
We Emergently Revascularize Occluded Coronaries for Cardiogenic Shock: one-year
survival following early revascularization for cardiogenic shock. JAMA.
2001; 285:
190192.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Dzavik V, Sleeper LA, Cocke TP, et al, for the SHOCK Investigators. Early
revascularization is associated with improved survival in elderly patients
with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: a report
from the SHOCK Trial Registry. Eur Heart J. 2003; 24:
828837.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Dauerman HL, Goldberg RJ, Malinski M, et al. Outcomes and early revascularization
for patients greater than or equal to 65 years of age with cardiogenic shock.
Am J Cardiol. 2001; 87:
844848.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Dauerman HL, Ryan TJ, Piper WD, et al. Outcomes of percutaneous coronary
intervention among elderly patients in cardiogenic shock: a multicenter,
decade-long experience. J Invasive Cardiol. 2003; 15:
380384.[Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Simoons ML, Arnold AE, Betriu A, et al. Thrombolysis with tissue plasminogen
activator in acute myocardial infarction: no additional benefit from immediate
percutaneous coronary angioplasty. Lancet. 1988; 1:
197203.[Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Ross AM, Coyne KS, Reiner JS, et al, for the PACT (Plasminogen-activator
Angioplasty Compatibility Trial). Investigators: A randomized trial comparing
primary angioplasty with a strategy of short-acting thrombolysis and immediate
planned rescue angioplasty in acute myocardial infarction: the PACT trial.
J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999; 34:
19541962.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Montalescot G, Barragan P, Wittenberg O, et al, for the ADMIRAL (Abciximab
before Direct Angioplasty and Stenting in Myocardial Infarction Regarding
Acute and Long-Term Follow-up). Investigators. Platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa
inhibition with coronary stenting for acute myocardial infarction. N Engl
J Med. 2001; 344:
18951903.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Zeymer U, Uebis R, Vogt A, et al, for the ALKK-Study Group. Randomized comparison
of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty and medical therapy in
stable survivors of acute myocardial infarction with single-vessel disease:
a study of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Leitende Kardiologische
Krankenhausärzte. Circulation. 2003; 108:
13241328.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Scheller B, Hennen B, Hammer B, et al, for the SIAM III Study Group. Beneficial
effects of immediate stenting after thrombolysis in acute myocardial infarction.
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003; 42:
634641.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Braunwald E, Antman E, Beasley J, et al. ACC/AHA 2002 guideline update for
the management of patients with unstable angina and nonST-segment elevation
myocardial infarction: summary article: a report of the American College
of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines
(Committee on the Management of Patients With Unstable Angina). J Am Coll
Cardiol. 2002; 40:
1366.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Stenestrand U, Wallentin L. Early revascularisation and 1-year survival in
14-day survivors of acute myocardial infarction: a prospective cohort study.
Lancet. 2002; 359:
18051811.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Alter DA, Tu JV, Austin PC, et al. Waiting times, revascularization modality,
and outcomes after acute myocardial infarction at hospitals with and without
on-site revascularization facilities in Canada. J Am Coll Cardiol.
2003; 42:
410419.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Gupta M, Chang WC, Van de Werf F, et al, for the ASSENT II Investigators.
International differences in in-hospital revascularization and outcomes following
acute myocardial infarction: a multilevel analysis of patients in ASSENT-2.
Eur Heart J. 2003; 24:
16401650.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Gibson CM, Karha J, Murphy SA, et al, for the TIMI Study Group. Early and
long-term clinical outcomes associated with reinfarction following fibrinolytic
administration in the thrombolysis in myocardial infarction trials. J
Am Coll Cardiol. 2003; 42:
716.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Lablanche JM, Gueret P, Blanchard D, et al. Beneficial effects of very early
PTCA in patients with intravenous thrombolysis for acute myocardial infarction:
data from a nation-wide registry in France. Circulation. 2002; 106
(suppl II): II-630.
Abstract.
-
Fernandez-Aviles F, Alonso JJ, Castro-Beiras A, et al. Prospective randomized
trial comparing a routine invasive strategy within 24 hours to thrombolysis
versus an ischemia-guided conservative approach to acute myocardial infarction
with ST-segment elevation: the Gracia-1 trial. Lancet. 2004. In
press.
-
ISIS-2 (Second International Study of Infarct Survival) Collaborative Group.
Randomised trial of intravenous streptokinase, oral aspirin, both, or neither
among 17,187 cases of suspected acute myocardial infarction: ISIS-2. Lancet.
1988; 2:
349360.[Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Granger CB, Hirsch J, Califf RM, et al. Activated partial thromboplastin
time and outcome after thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction:
results from the GUSTO-I trial. Circulation. 1996; 93:
870878.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
White HD, Yusuf S. Issues regarding the use of heparin following streptokinase
therapy. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 1995; 2:
510.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Thrombin-specific anticoagulation with bivalirudin versus heparin in patients
receiving fibrinolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction: the HERO-2
randomised trial. Lancet. 2001; 358:
18551863.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Bertrand ME, Rupprecht HJ, Urban P, et al. Double-blind study of the safety
of clopidogrel with and without a loading dose in combination with aspirin
compared with ticlopidine in combination with aspirin after coronary stenting
: the Clopidogrel Aspirin Stent International Cooperative Study (CLASSICS).
Circulation. 2000; 102:
624629.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Mehta SR, Yusuf S, Peters RJ, et al, for the Clopidogrel in Unstable angina
to prevent Recurrent Events trial (CURE) Investigators. Effects of pretreatment
with clopidogrel and aspirin followed by long-term therapy in patients undergoing
percutaneous coronary intervention: the PCI-CURE study. Lancet. 2001;
358:
527533.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Steinhubl SR, Berger PB, Mann JT III, et al, for the CREDO (Clopidogrel for
the Reduction of Events During Observation) Investigators. Early and sustained
dual oral antiplatelet therapy following percutaneous coronary intervention:
a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2002; 288:
24112420.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
CYPHERTM sirolimus-eluting coronary
stent on RAPTORTM over-the-wire delivery system and
CYPHERTM sirolimus-eluting coronary
stent on RAPTORRAIL® rapid exchange delivery system [instructions for
use]. Miami, FL; Cordis, a Johnson & Johnson Company; April
2003.
-
TAXUS: paclitaxel-eluting coronary stent system Monorail and over the wire
coronary stent delivery system [directions for use]. Natick, MA: Boston
Scientific; March
2004.
-
Patrono C, Bachmann F, Baigent C, et al. Expert consensus document on the
use of antiplatelet agents: The Task Force on the Use of Antiplatelet Agents
in Patients With Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease of the European Society
of Cardiology. Eur Heart J. 2004; 25:
166181.[Free
Full Text]
-
Levine GN, Kern MJ, Berger PB, et al, for the American Heart Association
Diagnostic and Interventional Catheterization Committee and Council on Clinical
Cardiology. Management of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary
revascularization. Ann Intern Med. 2003; 139:
123136.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Lee DP, Herity NA, Hiatt BL, et al, for the TIrofiban Given in the Emergency
Room before Primary Angioplasty. Adjunctive platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa
receptor inhibition with tirofiban before primary angioplasty improves
angiographic outcomes: results of the TIrofiban Given in the Emergency Room
before Primary Angioplasty (TIGER-PA) pilot trial. Circulation. 2003;
107:
14971501.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Finney SJ, Zekveld C, Elia A, et al. Glucose control and mortality in critically
ill patients. JAMA. 2003; 290:
20412047.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Clement S, Braithwaite SS, Magee MF, et al. Management of diabetes and
hyperglycemia in hospitals. Diabetes Care. 2004; 27:
553597.[Free
Full Text]
-
Third Report of the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Expert
Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in
Adults (Adult Treatment Panel III) final report. Circulation. 2002;
106:
31433421.[Free
Full Text]
-
Malan SS. Psychosocial adjustment following MI: current views and nursing
implications. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 1992; 6:
5770.
-
Havik OE, Maeland JG. Patterns of emotional reactions after a myocardial
infarction. J Psychosom Res. 1990; 34:
271285.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Moser DK, Dracup K. Is anxiety early after myocardial infarction associated
with subsequent ischemic and arrhythmic events? Psychosom Med. 1996;
58:
395401.[Abstract]
-
Frasure-Smith N, Lespérance F, Talajic M. The impact of negative emotions
on prognosis following myocardial infarction: is it more than depression?
Health Psychol. 1995; 14:
388398.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Chae Cu, Hennekens CH. Beta blockers. In: Hennekens CH, ed. Clinical Trials
in Cardiovascular Disease: A Companion to Braunwalds Heart Disease.
Philadelphia, Pa: WB Saunders 1999;
7994.
-
Latini R, Maggioni AP, Flather M, et al. ACE inhibitor use in patients with
myocardial infarction: summary of evidence from clinical trials.
Circulation. 1995; 92:
31323137.[Free
Full Text]
-
ACE Inhibitor Myocardial Infarction Collaborative Group. Indications for
ACE inhibitors in the early treatment of acute myocardial infarction: systematic
overview of individual data from 100,000 patients in randomized trials.
Circulation. 1998; 97:
22022212.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Flather MD, Yusuf S, Køber L, et al, for the ACE-Inhibitor Myocardial
Infarction Collaborative Group. Long-term ACE-inhibitor therapy in patients
with heart failure or left-ventricular dysfunction: a systematic overview
of data from individual patients. Lancet. 2000; 355:
15751581.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Pitt B, Zannad F, Remme WJ, et al, for the Randomized Aldactone Evaluation
Study Investigators. The effect of spironolactone on morbidity and mortality
in patients with severe heart failure. N Engl J Med. 1999; 341:
709717.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Pitt B, Remme W, Zannad F, et al, for the Eplerenone Post-Acute Myocardial
Infarction Heart Failure Efficacy and Survival Study Investigators. Eplerenone,
a selective aldosterone blocker, in patients with left ventricular dysfunction
after myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 2003; 348:
13091321.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Dickstein K, Kjekshus J, for the OPTIMAAL Steering Committee of the Optimal
Trial in Myocardial Infarction with Angiotensin II Antagonist Losartan (OPTIMAAL)
Study Group. Effects of losartan and captopril on mortality and morbidity
in high-risk patients after acute myocardial infarction: the OPTIMAAL randomised
trial: Optimal Trial in Myocardial Infarction with Angiotensin II Antagonist
Losartan. Lancet. 2002; 360:
752760.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Pfeffer MA, McMurray JJ, Velazquez EJ, et al, for the Valsartan in Acute
Myocardial Infarction Trial Investigators. Valsartan, captopril, or both
in myocardial infarction complicated by heart failure, left ventricular
dysfunction, or both. N Engl J Med. 2003; 349:
18931906.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Mann DL, Deswal A. Angiotensin-receptor blockade in acute myocardial infarction:
a matter of dose. N Engl J Med. 2003; 349:
19631965.[Free
Full Text]
-
Gibbons RJ, Miller TD, Christian TF. Infarct size measured by single photon
emission computed tomographic imaging with (99m) Tc-sestamibi: a measure
of the efficacy of therapy in acute myocardial infarction. Circulation.
2000; 101:
101108.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Klocke FJ, Baird MG, Bateman TM, et al. ACC/AHA/ASNC guidelines for the clinical
use of cardiac radionuclide imaging: a report of the American College of
Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines
(ACC/AHA/ASNC Committee to Revise the 1995 Guidelines for the Clinical Use
of Radionuclide Imaging). Available at:
http://www.acc.org/clinical/guidelines/radio/rni_fulltext.pdf,
2003. Accessed January 15,
2004.
-
Cheitlin MD, Armstrong WF, Aurigemma GP, et al. ACC/AHA/ASE 2003 guideline
update for the clinical application of echocardiography: a report of the
American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice
Guidelines (ACC/AHA/ASE Committee to Update the 1997 Guidelines for the Clinical
Application of Echocardiography). Available at:
www.acc.org/clinical/guidelines/echo/index.pdf,
2003. Accessed January 15,
2004.
-
Mahrholdt H, Wagner A, Holly TA, et al. Reproducibility of chronic infarct
size measurement by contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging.
Circulation. 2002; 106:
23222327.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Menon V, Slater JN, White HD, et al. Acute myocardial infarction complicated
by systemic hypoperfusion without hypotension: report of the SHOCK trial
registry. Am J Med. 2000; 108:
374380.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Hochman JS, Boland J, Sleeper LA, et al, for the SHOCK Registry Investigators.
Current spectrum of cardiogenic shock and effect of early revascularization
on mortality: results of an International Registry. Circulation.
1995; 91:
873881.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Hunt SA, Baker DW, Chin MH, et al. ACC/AHA guidelines for the evaluation
and management of chronic heart failure in the adult: a report of the American
College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice
Guidelines (Committee to Revise the 1995 Guidelines for the Evaluation and
Management of Heart Failure). Available at:
http://www.acc.org/clinical/guidelines/failure/hf_index.htm,
2001. Accessed June 5,
2004.
-
Kinch JW, Ryan TJ. Right ventricular infarction. N Engl J Med. 1994;
330:
12111217.[Free
Full Text]
-
Núñez L, de la Llana R, López Sendón J, et al.
Diagnosis and treatment of subacute free wall ventricular rupture after
infarction. Ann Thorac Surg. 1983; 35:
525529.[Abstract]
-
Guidelines for cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiac care:
Emergency Cardiac Care Committee and Subcommittees, American Heart Association:
Part III: adult advanced cardiac life support. JAMA. 1992; 268:
21992241.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Campbell RWF. Arrhythmias. In: Julian DG. Braunwald E, eds. Management of
Acute Myocardial Infarction. London, England: WB Saunders 1994;
223240.
-
Kontoyannis DA, Anastasiou-Nana MI, Kontoyannis SA, et al. Intravenous amiodarone
decreases the duration of atrial fibrillation associated with acute myocardial
infarction. Cardiovasc Drugs Ther. 2001; 15:
155160.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Ryan TJ, Antman EM, Brooks NH, et al. ACC/AHA guidelines for the management
of patients with acute myocardial infarction: 1999 guideline update: a report
of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force
on Practice Guidelines (Committee on Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction).
J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999; 34:
890911.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Gregoratos G, Abrams J, Epstein AE, et al. ACC/AHA/NASPE 2002 guideline update
for implantation of cardiac pacemakers and antiarrhythmia devices: summary
article: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart
Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (ACC/AHA/NASPE Committee to
Update the 1998 Pacemaker Guidelines). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002; 40:
17031719.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Lamas GA, Ellenbogen KA. Evidence base for pacemaker mode selection: from
physiology to randomized trials. Circulation. 2004; 109:
443451.[Free
Full Text]
-
Eagle KA, Guyton RA, Davidoff R, et al. ACC/AHA guidelines for coronary artery
bypass graft surgery: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American
Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee to Revise
the 1991 Guidelines for Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery). American College
of Cardiology/American Heart Association. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999;
34:
12621347.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Dyke C, Bhatia D. Inhibitors of the platelet receptor glycoprotein IIb-IIIa
and complications during percutaneous coronary revascularization: management
strategies for the cardiac surgeon. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino). 1999;
40:
505516.[Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Yusuf S, Zhao F, Mehta SR, et al, for the Clopidogrel in Unstable Angina
to Prevent Recurrent Events Trial Investigators. Effects of clopidogrel in
addition to aspirin in patients with acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment
elevation. N Engl J Med. 2001; 345:
494502.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Physicians Desk Reference. Clopidogrel package insert. Montvale, NJ:
Medical Economics Co;
2756.
-
Gibbons RJ, Balady GJ, Bricker JT, et al. ACC/AHA 2002 guideline update for
exercise testing: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American
Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee on Exercise
Testing). Available at:
http://www.acc.org/clinical/guidelines/exercise/exercise_clean.pdf,
2002. Accessed February 12,
2004.
-
Théroux P, Waters DD, Halphen C, et al. Prognostic value of exercise
testing soon after myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 1979; 301:
341345.[Abstract]
-
DeBusk RF, Kraemer HC, Nash E, et al. Stepwise risk stratification soon after
acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol. 1983; 52:
11611166.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Krone RJ, Gillespie JA, Weld FM, et al. Low-level exercise testing after
myocardial infarction: usefulness in enhancing clinical risk stratification.
Circulation. 1985; 71:
8089.[Abstract]
-
Valentine PA, Frew JL, Mashford ML, et al. Lidocaine in the prevention of
sudden death in the pre-hospital phase of acute infarction: a double-blind
study. N Engl J Med. 1974; 291:
13271331.[Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Ross J, Gilpin EA, Madsen EB, et al. A decision scheme for coronary angiography
after acute myocardial infarction. Circulation. 1989; 79:
292303.[Abstract]
-
Risk stratification and survival after myocardial infarction. N Engl J
Med. 1983; 309:
331336.[Abstract]
-
Zaret BL, Wackers TH, Terrin M, et al. Does left ventricular ejection fraction
following thrombolytic therapy have the same prognostic impact described
in the prethrombolytic era? Results of the TIMI II Trial. J Am Coll Cardiol.
1991; 17: 214A.
Abstract.
-
Roig E, Magriñá J, Garcia A, et al. Prognostic value of exercise
radionuclide angiography in low-risk acute myocardial infarction survivors.
Eur Heart J. 1993; 14:
213218.[Abstract]
-
Gibbons RJ, Abrams J, Chatterjee K, et al. ACC/AHA 2002 guideline update
for the management of patients with chronic stable angina: a report of the
American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice
Guidelines (Committee to Update the 1999 Guidelines for the Management of
Patients with Chronic Stable Angina). Available at:
www.acc.org/clinical/guidelines/stable/stable.pdf
2002. Accessed March 18,
2004.
-
ONeill WW. "Watchful waiting" after thrombolysis: its time for
a re-evaluation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003; 42:
1719.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Smith SC, Blair SN, Bonow RO, et al. AHA/ACC scientific statement: AHA/ACC
guidelines for preventing heart attack and death in patients with atherosclerotic
cardiovascular disease: 2001 update: a statement for healthcare professionals
from the American Heart Association and the American College of Cardiology.
Circulation. 2001; 104:
15771579.[Free
Full Text]
-
Mosca L, Appel LJ, Benjamin EJ, et al. Evidence-based guidelines for
cardiovascular disease prevention in women. Circulation. 2004; 109:
672693.[Free
Full Text]
-
Dalal H, Evans PH, Campbell JL. Recent developments in secondary prevention
and cardiac rehabilitation after acute myocardial infarction. BMJ.
2004; 328:
693697.[Free
Full Text]
-
Gutstein DE, Fuster V. Pathophysiologic bases for adjunctive therapies in
the treatment and secondary prevention of acute myocardial infarction. Clin
Cardiol. 1998; 21:
161168.[Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
CAPRIE Steering Committee. A randomised, blinded, trial of clopidogrel versus
aspirin in patients at risk of ischaemic events (CAPRIE). Lancet.
1996; 348:
13291339.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Hurlen M, Smith P, Arnesen H. Effects of warfarin, aspirin and the two combined,
on mortality and thromboembolic morbidity after myocardial infarction: the
WARIS-II (Warfarin-Aspirin Reinfarction Study) design. Scand Cardiovasc
J. 2000; 34:
168171.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
van Es RF, Jonker JJ, Verheugt FW, et al, for the Antithrombotics in the
Secondary Prevention of Events in Coronary Thrombosis-2 (ASPECT-2) Research
Group. Aspirin and coumadin after acute coronary syndromes (the ASPECT-2
study): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2002; 360:
109113.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Brouwer MA, van den Bergh PJ, Aengevaeren WR, et al. Aspirin plus coumarin
versus aspirin alone in the prevention of reocclusion after fibrinolysis
for acute myocardial infarction: results of the Antithrombotics in the Prevention
of Reocclusion In Coronary Thrombolysis (APRICOT)-2 Trial. Circulation.
2002; 106:
659665.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Yusuf S, Sleight P, Pogue J, et al, for the Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation
Study Investigators. Effects of an angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor,
ramipril, on cardiovascular events in high-risk patients. N Engl J Med.
2000; 342:
145153.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Fox KM, for the EURopean trial On reduction of cardiac events with Perindopril
in stable coronary Artery disease Investigators. Efficacy of perindopril
in reduction of cardiovascular events among patients with stable coronary
artery disease: randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre
trial (the EUROPA study). Lancet. 2003; 362:
782788.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Granger CB, McMurray JJ, Yusuf S, et al, for the CHARM Investigators and
Committees. Effects of candesartan in patients with chronic heart failure
and reduced left-ventricular systolic function intolerant to
angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors: the CHARM-Alternative trial.
Lancet. 2003; 362:
772776.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
McMurray JJ, Ostergren J, Swedberg K, et al, for the CHARM Investigators
and Committees. Effects of candesartan in patients with chronic heart failure
and reduced left-ventricular systolic function taking
angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors: the CHARM-Added trial. Lancet.
2003; 362:
767771.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Yusuf S, Pfeffer MA, Swedberg K, et al, for the CHARM Investigators and
Committees. Effects of candesartan in patients with chronic heart failure
and preserved left-ventricular ejection fraction: the CHARM-Preserved trial.
Lancet. 2003; 362:
777781.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Executive Council of the Heart Failure Society of America. Implications of
recent clinical trials for heart failure performance measures. J Card
Fail. 2004; 10:
45.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Deleted in press.
-
Antman E, Braunwald E. Acute myocardial infarction. In: Braunwald E, Zipes
DP, Libby P, eds. Heart Disease: A Textbook of Cardiovascular Medicine. 6th
ed. Philadelphia, Pa: WB Saunders; 2001: 11141251.Chapter
5.
-
Gheorghiade M, Colucci WS, Swedberg K. Beta-blockers in chronic heart failure.
Circulation. 2003; 107:
15701575.[Free
Full Text]
-
Chen J, Radford MJ, Wang Y, et al. Are beta-blockers effective in elderly
patients who undergo coronary revascularization after acute myocardial
infarction? Arch Intern Med. 2000; 160:
947952.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Seventh report of the Joint National Committee on the Prevention, Detection,
Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC 7): resetting the
hypertension sails. Hypertension. 2003; 41:
11781179.[Free
Full Text]
-
Hulley S, Grady D, Bush T, et al, for the Heart and Estrogen/progestin
Replacement Study (HERS) Research Group. Randomized trial of estrogen plus
progestin for secondary prevention of coronary heart disease in postmenopausal
women. JAMA. 1998; 280:
605613.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Grady D, Herrington D, Bittner V, et al, for the HERS Research Group.
Cardiovascular disease outcomes during 6.8 years of hormone therapy: Heart
and Estrogen/progestin Replacement Study follow-up (HERS II). JAMA.
2002; 288:
4957.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Rossouw JE, Anderson GL, Prentice RL, et al, for the Writing Group for the
Womens Health Initiative Investigators. Risks and benefits of estrogen
plus progestin in healthy postmenopausal women: principal results from the
Womens Health Initiative randomized controlled trial. JAMA.
2002; 288:
321333.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Cairns JA, Markham BA. Economics and efficacy in choosing oral anticoagulants
or aspirin after myocardial infarction. JAMA. 1995; 273:
965967.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Kris-Etherton PM, Lichtenstein AH, Howard BV, Steinberg D, Witzman JL.
Antioxidant vitamin supplements and cardiovascular disease.
Circulation. In
press.
-
Glassman AH, OConnor CM, Califf RM, et al, for the Sertraline
Antidepressant Heart Attack Randomized Trial (SADHEART) Group. Sertraline
treatment of major depression in patients with acute MI or unstable angina.
JAMA. 2002; 288:
701709.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Swenson JR, OConnor CM, Barton D, et al, for the Sertraline Antidepressant
Heart Attack Randomized Trial (SADHART) Group. Influence of depression and
effect of treatment with sertraline on quality of life after hospitalization
for acute coronary syndrome. Am J Cardiol. 2003; 92:
12711276.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]
-
Berkman LF, Blumenthal J, Burg M, et al, for the Enhancing Recovery in Coronary
Heart Disease Patients Investigators (ENRICHD). Effects of treating depression
and low perceived social support on clinical events after myocardial infarction:
the Enhancing Recovery in Coronary Heart Disease Patients (ENRICHD) Randomized
Trial. JAMA. 2003; 289:
31063116.[Abstract/Free
Full Text]
-
Alonzo AA. Acute myocardial infarction and posttraumatic stress disorder:
the consequences of cumulative adversity. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 1999;
13:
3345.[Medline]
[Order
article via Infotrieve]