Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorLashwood, David
dc.date.accessioned2021-04-24T13:32:58Z
dc.date.available2021-04-24T13:32:58Z
dc.date.issued2020-09-07
dc.identifier.citationLashwood, D. 2020. Prehospital thrombolysis for STEMI where PPCI delays are unavoidable. Journal of Paramedic Practice, 12 (9), 361-366.en_US
dc.identifier.issn1759-1376
dc.identifier.issn2041-9457
dc.identifier.doi10.12968/jpar.2020.12.9.361
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12417/1057
dc.description.abstractPrimary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) is the gold standard for treating patients experiencing ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction (STEMI). More than 30 000 patients experience cardiac arrest out of a hospital setting in the UK every year and may be some distance from a PPCI facility. Aims: To analyse and consider if a better outcome could be achieved for patients if PPCI was an adjunct to thrombolytic therapy, where delays of ≥60 minutes are inevitable or unavoidable. Methods: The current review examined a range of articles, research materials and databases. Results: Some studies suggested the use of prehospital thrombolysis while others compared the effectiveness of drug-eluting stents. While the ‘gold standard’ for the treatment of patients experiencing a myocardial infarction is still PPCI, several factors can delay patients from receiving this treatment at an appropriate facility within the recommended time frame. Conclusion: Patients may not be able to access PPCI within 60, 90 or 120 minutes for reasons including increasing urbanisation, population growth and NHS hospital funding cuts. If the PPCI unit is some distance away, ambulance crews could start thrombolysis treatment and transmit clinical findings to a specialist cardiologist in the PPCI facility, or stop at a local hospital that could provide thrombolysis. Abstract published with permission.
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.subjectEmergency Medical Servicesen_US
dc.subjectPre-hospital Careen_US
dc.subjectMyocardial Infarctionen_US
dc.subjectThrombolysisen_US
dc.subjectPrimary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PPCI)en_US
dc.titlePrehospital thrombolysis for STEMI where PPCI delays are unavoidableen_US
dc.source.journaltitleJournal of Paramedic Practiceen_US
rioxxterms.versionNAen_US
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttp://www.rioxx.net/licenses/all-rights-reserveden_US
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2021-02-02
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_US
refterms.panelUnspecifieden_US
refterms.dateFirstOnline2020-09-07
html.description.abstractPrimary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) is the gold standard for treating patients experiencing ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction (STEMI). More than 30 000 patients experience cardiac arrest out of a hospital setting in the UK every year and may be some distance from a PPCI facility. Aims: To analyse and consider if a better outcome could be achieved for patients if PPCI was an adjunct to thrombolytic therapy, where delays of ≥60 minutes are inevitable or unavoidable. Methods: The current review examined a range of articles, research materials and databases. Results: Some studies suggested the use of prehospital thrombolysis while others compared the effectiveness of drug-eluting stents. While the ‘gold standard’ for the treatment of patients experiencing a myocardial infarction is still PPCI, several factors can delay patients from receiving this treatment at an appropriate facility within the recommended time frame. Conclusion: Patients may not be able to access PPCI within 60, 90 or 120 minutes for reasons including increasing urbanisation, population growth and NHS hospital funding cuts. If the PPCI unit is some distance away, ambulance crews could start thrombolysis treatment and transmit clinical findings to a specialist cardiologist in the PPCI facility, or stop at a local hospital that could provide thrombolysis. Abstract published with permission.en_US


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record