Quality assessment in STEMI patients: the Belgian STEMI registry...

Post on 27-Jul-2020

0 views 0 download

Transcript of Quality assessment in STEMI patients: the Belgian STEMI registry...

Quality assessment in STEMI patients:

the Belgian STEMI registry : 2007-2014

Belgian Interdisciplinary Working Group on

Acute Cardiology (BIWAC)

College of Cardiology

Lethality of AMI 2000-2003: MKG data

From dr W Aelvoet, RIZIV/ENAMI

N= 44782 AMI in hospital lethality: 15.9%

STEMI registry : Organisation

•Belgian Interdisciplinary working group of acute cardiology

Ministry of Public Health

College of Cardiology

BIWAC *

Steering committee: 16 members

regional representation

Local Investigators:

one (two) responsibles / hospital

Minimal Data Base

Patient characteristics (TIMI risk score) Reperfusion strategy In Hospital Outcome

Electronic CRF

TIMI risk score (automatically calculated)

Circulation: 2000;102:2031

Presenter
Presentation Notes
Circul 2000: 102; 2031 Op basis van 14000 patienten uit INTIME 2 + validatie in TIMI 9 trial

Enrolment STEMI patients 1/1/2007 – 31/12/2013

3733

798

800

136

1289

3469

968

1683 2262

n= 15816 110 hospitals

60 hospitals with >10 pts/y

0

1000

2000

3000

AUDIT STEMI REGISTRY:2007-2013

Centre Source doc. Correct item

2007-2008 (16) 2008-2009 (15) 2009-2010 (14) 2010-2011 (14) 2011-2012 (10) 2012-2013 (10) 2013-2014 (10)

2468/3255= 76% 2541/2877= 88% 2445/2793= 88% 2427/2877= 84% 1763/2100= 84% 1733/2058= 84%

2356/2468=95% 2460/2541=97% 2349/2445=96% 2348/2427=97% 1714/1763=97% 1683/1733=97%

* prize: ESC textbook of Intensive and Acute cardiac care

Publications – abstracts/reports • 2008:

– ACC (Versaille): STEMI in PCI vs non-PCI – Activity report: focus on time

• 2009: – BSC: PCI vs TT – ESC (Barcelona): PCI vs TT – ESC (Barcelona): DM vs non-DM – ESC (Barcelona): STEMI and gender – Activity report: focus on cardiogenic shock

• 2010: – BSC: no reperfusion vs reperfusion – ACC (USA): STEMI and gender – ESC (Stockholm); STEMI and elderly – ACC (Kopenhagen): STEMI and no reperfusion – Activity report: focus on gender

Publications – abstracts/reports

• 2011: – BSC: STEMI and no reperfusion STEMI and young patients Door to balloon time revisited? - ESC: STEMI and octogenerians door to balloon time revisited? – Activity report: focus on elderly patients

• 2012: - BSC : interhospital variation in length of hospital stay - Activity report: focus on PCI vs no-PCI centres

Publications – abstracts/reports

• 2013: - ESC: Impact of transition of thrombolysis to primary PCI on

door-to-balloon and mortality -ACC: Impact of transition of thrombolysis to primary PCI on door-to-

balloon time and mortality - Activity report: evolution of reperfusion therapy in Belgium

• 2014: – ESC: impact of mode of arrival on reperfusion therapy – Activity report: quality indicators for STEMI

Publications 1. Claeys et al, Contemporary mortality differences between primary PCI and

thrombolysis ina community-based STEMI population. Arch Intern Med. 2011;171(6):544-549

2. Claeys et al, STEMI mortality in community hospitals versus PCI-capable hospitals: results from a nationwide STEMI network programme. EHJ: Acute Cardiovascular Care 2012;1(1) 40–47

3. Claeys et al; Inter-hospital variation in length of hospital stay after STEMI patients: results from the Belgian STEMI registry, Acta Cardiologica 2013: 68(3); 235-239

4. Gevaert et al. Renal dysfunction in STEMI-patients undergoing primary angioplasty : higher prevalence but equal prognostic impact in female patients; an observational cohort study from the Belgian STEMI registry BMC nephrology 2013-14; 62

5. Gevaert et al.: Gender, TIMI-risk score and in-hospital mortality in STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI, results from the Belgian STEMI registry Euro-intervention 2014;9: 1095-1101

6. VandeCastele et al : Reperfusion therapy and mortality in octogenarian STEMI patients: Results from the Belgian STEMI registry, Clinical Research in Cardiology 2013; 102; 837-45

Mortality versus Reperfusion strategy

Claeys et al, Arch of Intern Med 2011

Presenter
Presentation Notes
16% prehosp TT in de groep van TT (mortaliteit 8% bij preTT vs inhosp TT) Highly different risk profile, TT are selected for low risk patients: smaller difference than ex

Mortality versus Reperfusion strategy

Claeys et al, Arch of Intern Med 2011

Presenter
Presentation Notes
16% prehosp TT in de groep van TT (mortaliteit 8% bij preTT vs inhosp TT) Highly different risk profile, TT are selected for low risk patients: smaller difference than ex

Mortality versus Reperfusion strategy

Claeys et al, Arch of Intern Med 2011

Presenter
Presentation Notes
16% prehosp TT in de groep van TT (mortaliteit 8% bij preTT vs inhosp TT) Highly different risk profile, TT are selected for low risk patients: smaller difference than ex

Mortality versus Reperfusion strategy

Claeys et al, Arch of Intern Med 2011

Early PCI: < 60 min

Interm PCI: 60-120

Late PCI: > 120 min

Early TT: <30 min

Interm T: 30-60 min

Late T: > 60 min

Door-t- balloon time should be less than 60 min to obtain lowest mortality rates !!

Presenter
Presentation Notes
16% prehosp TT in de groep van TT (mortaliteit 8% bij preTT vs inhosp TT) Highly different risk profile, TT are selected for low risk patients: smaller difference than ex

Mortality versus Reperfusion strategy

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Perc

ent

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >9TIMI risk score

N= 11467

Trombolysis N=665

Rescue PCI N=299

PCI N= 9617

Faciliated PCI N=250

No Reperfus. 636

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

Perc

ent

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >9TIMI risk score

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Perc

ent

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >9TIMI risk score

3.9

N = 954 ( 8%)* N=9867(86%) N= 636 (6%)

4.1 5.9

MORTALITY

6.0 % 6,7% 19%

*Elective Invasive evaluation:502+299=801( 84%)

Presenter
Presentation Notes
16% prehosp TT in de groep van TT (mortaliteit 8% bij preTT vs inhosp TT) Highly different risk profile, TT are selected for low risk patients: smaller difference than ex

Attenuation of mortality benefit PCI over TT

0 5

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 >8

PCI thrombolysis

PCI vs TT : P=0.02

InTIME II

Claeys et al, Arch of Intern Med 2011

Presenter
Presentation Notes
We compared TT versus PCI for the different risk score. Absolute benefit is highly P value? TT: 6.8% vs PCI: 5.6% (p=0.26) Logist regressie p=0.01

mortality in octogenarian STEMI

Vandecasteele et al, Clinical Research in Cardiology 2013

Presenter
Presentation Notes
We compared TT versus PCI for the different risk score. Absolute benefit is highly P value? TT: 6.8% vs PCI: 5.6% (p=0.26) Logist regressie p=0.01

Mortality in octogenarian STEMI

Vandecasteele et al, Clinical Research in

Cardiology 2013

Presenter
Presentation Notes
We compared TT versus PCI for the different risk score. Absolute benefit is highly P value? TT: 6.8% vs PCI: 5.6% (p=0.26) Logist regressie p=0.01

Mortality versus Acute cardiac care program

Claeys et al, EHJ-ACC 2012

Presenter
Presentation Notes
P=0.07 P=0.16 Indien reperfusie eruit: verschil 6.3 vs 6.5 First admission in Admitted in PCI centr versus first admission. 70% versus 32% (no PCI centres are definitely still under represented in this registry, we will encourage.;) Risk profile of the is identical Obviously the reperfusion strategy is different with initial invasive approach in almost The we are dealing with a more tailored invasive approach it How does this translate into outcome.

Mortality versus Acute cardiac care program

Claeys et al, EHJ-ACC 2012

Presenter
Presentation Notes
P=0.07 P=0.16 Indien reperfusie eruit: verschil 6.3 vs 6.5 First admission in Admitted in PCI centr versus first admission. 70% versus 32% (no PCI centres are definitely still under represented in this registry, we will encourage.;) Risk profile of the is identical Obviously the reperfusion strategy is different with initial invasive approach in almost The we are dealing with a more tailored invasive approach it How does this translate into outcome.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

Perc

ent

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >9TIMI risk score

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

Perc

ent

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >9TIMI risk score

Mortality versus Acute cardiac care program

4.2 4.1 MORTALITY

6.7%

PCI centre N=7024(60%)

trombolysis: 2%

Rescue PCI: 1%

Prim –facilat PCI: 93%

No reperfusion: 4 %

No-PCI centre

N=4443 (40%)

trombolysis: 15%

Rescue PCI: 5%

Prim –facilat PCI:75%

No reperfusion: 8 %

6.9%

Claeys et al, EHJ-ACC 2012

Presenter
Presentation Notes
P=0.07 P=0.16 Indien reperfusie eruit: verschil 6.3 vs 6.5 First admission in Admitted in PCI centr versus first admission. 70% versus 32% (no PCI centres are definitely still under represented in this registry, we will encourage.;) Risk profile of the is identical Obviously the reperfusion strategy is different with initial invasive approach in almost The we are dealing with a more tailored invasive approach it How does this translate into outcome.

Regional data on Reperfusion therapy

87

90

94

40 84

91

70

85 87

Primary PCI

4,6

86

2,2 1,7 5,4 0

20

40

60

80

100

thromb. PPCI ResPCI facPCI no rep

reperfusion therapy

77,4 81,2 86,6 89,8 92,7 92,8 93,3

0

50

100

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Presenter
Presentation Notes
P<0.001

Evolution reperfusion therapy

5 4 4 4 3 4 3 6 4 2 2 1 1 1

89 92 94 94 96 95 96

0 20 40 60 80

100

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

no reperf TT PCI

PCI center

11 11 8 6 6 6 7

33 23 15 11 6 5 3

56 66

77 83 88 89 90

0 20 40 60 80

100

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

no reperf TT PCI

No-PCI center

Reperfusion time: diagnosis to balloon time

16

34 22

11 13 3

-10

10

30

50

<30 30-60 60-90 90-120 >120 NA

DTB (min)

14

36

22 12 15 12

35 24

13 15

-10

10

30

50

<30 30-60 60-90 90-120 >120

DTB (min) DAY vs NIGHT (20-7)

P=0.04

Reperfusion time: diagnosis to balloon time

7,1 7,6 9,6 8,5

10,5 12,2 10

2,7 2,8 5,5 5,8 6

8 7

0

5

10

15

20

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

DTN 90-120 DTN>120

P<0.001

P<0.001

9 10 11 10 11 13

11 11 11 14

12 13 16 15

0

5

10

15

20

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

DTN 90-120 DTN>120

P<0.001

Early infarction (<3h)

Presenter
Presentation Notes
Early TT: 4.1% doch RR is identiek , niet significant

Quality indicator: DTB>120 in PCI centres

0

,05

,1

,15

,2

,25

,3

e

d

e

r

l)

e

e

e

)

c

t

h

n

s

e

t

t

m

Mean=10%

% DTB>120 in non-PCI centres: 20%

Regional data on in hospital mortality

8.8

5.4

5.5

5.9 4.5

7.2

4.9

6.2 7.6

Average:6,9%

In nonCPR pt: 3.9%

Mortality

30d mortility (n=7031)

5.4 % (vs 4.8% in hospital)

6,4 7,6 7,6 5,9 6,3 7,3 7

0 2 4 6 8

Presenter
Presentation Notes
The mean in hosptial mortality rate is 6.8% , evolutie p=0.03 In almost 1500 patient we have also data on 30 d mortality and this show a mortality of 6.8 % a difference of 1.3% which is concordant with international data.

Indepedent predictors of mortality

P value 0R (95%CI)

Killip > 1 <.0001 5 (4 - 7)

CPR <.0001 5 ( 4-6)

age <.0001 1.04 (1.03-1.05)

PCI vs TT No reperf

0.02 <0,0001

1.5 ( 1.1 – 2.7) 2,3 (1,7-3,1)

Ischemia>4h 0.0001 1.5 (1.3-2.0)

PAD <0.0001 1,8 (1.4-2.4) female 0.01 1.3 (1. 1-2.0)

Presenter
Presentation Notes
Region and PCI centres are no independent predictors Individual components of the TIMI risk score

Conclusions

• The present study demonstrates that thanks to the promotion and implementation of the concept of STEMI network in Belgium, PCI rate increased significantly, particularly in the community hospitals, and reached a penetration rate of >90% which is in line with European recommendations.

• The transition of thrombolysis to transfer for pPCI in the setting of a STEMI network was, however, associated with almost 50% increase of the proportion of patients with prolonged diagnosis-to-balloon time.

Presenter
Presentation Notes
the emergency medical system (EMS) capacity was not adapted to the increased need for transferring patient to PCI capable hospitals

European guidelines on STEMI, from Steg et al. , Eur Heart J 201 2;33:2569- 261 9

ESC guidelines

European guidelines on revascularisation, from Windecker et al. , Eur Heart J 201 4

EMS = SMUR

Project 2014-2015

• Quality indicators in STEMI patient – Diagnosis to-balloon time (system time) – Door-to-balloon time – Reperfusion therapy – Discharge medications