key: cord-1015490-24o6bxuw
authors: Yamaguchi, Junichi; Matoba, Tetsuya; Kikuchi, Migaku; Minami, Yuichiro; Kojima, Sunao; Hanada, Hiroyuki; Mano, Toshiaki; Nakashima, Takahiro; Hashiba, Katsutaka; Yamamoto, Takeshi; Tanaka, Akihito; Matsuo, Kunihiro; Nakayama, Naoki; Nomura, Osamu; Tahara, Yoshio; Nonogi, Hiroshi
title: Effects of Door-In to Door-Out Time on Mortality Among ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Patients Transferred for Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ― Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis ―
date: 2022-02-25
journal: Circulation reports
DOI: 10.1253/circrep.cr-21-0160
sha: 54cf3445ec324890f799af3da7b262cdef08c7f3
doc_id: 1015490
cord_uid: 24o6bxuw

Background: Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is now widely accepted. Recent guidelines have focused on total ischemic time, because shorter total ischemic time is associated with a more favorable prognosis. The door-in to door-out (DIDO) time, defined as time from arrival at a non-PCI-capable hospital to leaving for a PCI-capable hospital, may affect STEMI patient prognosis. However, a relevant meta-analysis is lacking. Methods and Results: We searched PubMed for clinical studies comparing short-term (30-day and in-hospital) mortality rates of STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI with DIDO times of ≤30 vs. >30 min. Two investigators independently screened the search results and extracted the data. Random effects estimators with weights calculated by the inverse variance method were used to determine pooled risk ratios. The search retrieved 1,260 studies; of these, 2 retrospective cohort studies (15,596 patients) were analyzed. In the DIDO time ≤30 and >30 min groups, the primary endpoint (i.e., in-hospital or 30-day mortality) occurred for 51 of 1,794 (2.8%) and 831 of 13,802 (6.0%) patients, respectively. The incidence of the primary endpoint was significantly lower in the DIDO time ≤30 min group (odds ratio 0.45; 95% confidence interval 0.34–0.60). Conclusions: Our findings suggest that a DIDO time ≤30 min is associated with a lower short-term mortality rate. However, further larger systematic reviews and meta-analyses are needed to validate our findings.

Results were summarized using a random effects model to facilitate the pooling of estimates of the treatment effects. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) are used to express dichotomous outcomes. Heterogeneity between trials for each outcome was evaluated using the I 2 statistic to quantify inconsistency, 19 and the findings were considered significant if the reason for heterogeneity could not be explained and the I 2 value was ≥50%. A funnel plot was generated to investigate potential publication bias. The estimates for each outcome were pooled using a ran-patients who had a door-to-balloon time <90 min and those who did not. 4 A door-to-device time <90 min is still the minimum acceptable time, but not the target time. The goal should be to make the time from the onset of STEMI to reperfusion as short as possible, considering that a shorter total ischemic time is associated with a more favorable prognosis. The ability of non-PCI-capable hospitals to rapidly identify patients with STEMI and transfer them to PCI-capable hospitals to shorten total ischemic time is critical. Several studies have already reported the importance of door-in to door-out (DIDO) time, defined as the time interval from arrival at a non-PCI-capable hospital to transfer to a PCI hospital. 5-7 Previous guidelines for STEMI recommended that the DIDO time should be ≤30 min, 8 and this has been widely adopted as an essential metric of the quality of STEMI care. 3 In addition, factors associated with DIDO times have been investigated. 6,7,9-12 However, a meta-analysis of recent relevant studies is lacking. Accordingly, this systematic review aimed to clarify the association between DIDO time and short-term mortality among STEMI patients transferred for primary PCI by analyzing the recent literature.

The Japan Resuscitation Council (JRC) ACS Task Force was established for the JRC guideline 2020 organized by the Japanese Circulation Society, the Japanese Association of Acute Medicine, and the Japanese Society of Internal Medicine. The JRC ACS Task Force set 12 clinically relevant questions against which this systematic review was conducted. Based on a discussion between the JRC ACS Task 

Published reports in the PubMed database were systematically searched to retrieve relevant articles for review. We searched for full-text papers describing interventions in humans published before April 2020. A combination of key terms was used to establish the search strategy Table 2 . 6, 7 Outcomes A forest plot of the primary outcome is shown in Figure 2 . The primary endpoint, in-hospital or 30-day mortality, was observed in 51 of 1,794 patients (2.8%) in the group with a DIDO time ≤30 min and in 831 of 13,802 patients (6.0%) with a DIDO time >30 min. The incidence of the primary endpoint was significantly lower in the group with a DIDO time ≤30 min than in the group with a DIDO time >30 min (OR 0.45 [95% CI 0.34-0.60]; 34 fewer per 1,000 [95% CI 41 fewer to 25 fewer]; Table 3 ).

dom effects model, and the meta-analysis was performed based on all available published data. All analyses were performed using Review Manager software 5.3.

We identified 1,260 studies in PubMed. Only 29 remained after the title and abstract review. The full-text review process eliminated another 27 studies because of an inappropriate comparator, study design, intervention, or outcome. This left 2 retrospective cohort studies 6,7 that were included in the present meta-analysis (Figure 1 ).

The characteristics of the included studies are summarized in Table 1 . In all, 15,596 patients were included in the 2 retrospective cohort studies. 6,7 In both studies, patients 

For reference, visual inspection of the funnel plot revealed no asymmetry for the primary endpoint (Supplementary Figure 2) . The certainty of the evidence for each outcome was assessed and a summary is provided in the evidence profile in Table 3 . Finally, we judged the level of evidence

The authors' judgment about each risk of bias item for each included study is shown in Figure 2 . The presence of publication bias could not be analyzed because only 2 retrospective observational studies were included in this analysis. Table) . Shi et al 7 also reported that after-hours presentation was one of the independent predictors of a delay in the DIDO time, suggesting it would be one of the risk factors for higher mortality in STEMI patients.

A national retrospective cohort study in the US revealed that hospital characteristics affected the DIDO time for the referral hospitals. 5 Patient-level characteristics such as age, sex, heart rate, diabetes, signs of heart failure, and a history of cerebral infarction were also suggested as factors related to DIDO time. 6 Other common reasons for the delay in DIDO times were awaiting transport and emergency department delays, diagnostic dilemmas, and nondiagnostic initial electrocardiography (ECG; median 81 min; IQR 64-110.5 min), 9 and difficulties interpreting the ECG. 10 Hospital practices to improve systems to minimize transfer time in STEMI patients are also essential. Expert consensus identified and verified 18 critical factors, including the use of emergency medical services transport, prehospital ECG, and protocols for transferring STEMI patients, among others, to minimize transfer time to PCI-capable hospitals. 11,12 However, it seemed still difficult to achieve the 30-min DIDO goal and the there is a need for continued focus on strategies for reducing DIDO time, including system-wide quality improvement programs. Moreover, there are some factors for which no consensus has been reached; we propose to investigate and examine these factors in clinical practice in Japan.

Considering the geographical and medical conditions, to be very low.

This meta-analysis examined the effect of DIDO time on mortality among STEMI patients who underwent primary PCI. To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first to reveal that a DIDO time of ≤30 min was associated with lower short-term mortality rates. The prognosis of patients with STEMI depends on the time from onset to reperfusion of the infarct-related culprit artery. Primary PCI for STEMI within 12 h of symptom onset is considered appropriate and has become standard of care. 20 A previous guideline recommended that primary PCI should be achieved within 90 min of the patient's arrival at the medical institution. 3 However, recent guidelines have focused on total ischemic time from the onset of STEMI, 20,21 and a door-to-balloon time of ≤90 min is no longer a target.

Even in the recent era, not all STEMI patients have reached PCI-capable hospitals in a timely manner for several reasons, such as coming from suburban or outer islands. A recent study reported that the COVID-19 pandemic and the outbreak response have had adverse effects on the efficiency of primary PCI services. 22 Accordingly, in the timeline for appropriate reperfusion of the infarct-related culprit artery, minimizing each component of the total ischemic time (i.e., symptom-to-door time, DIDO, doorout time to a PCI-capable hospital, and door-to-balloon time) is essential to improve the prognosis of STEMI patients.

In the present meta-analysis, we focused on DIDO time. No previous study has examined the frequency of adverse events, such as cardiac arrest, cardiac rupture, and reinfarction during transfer from non-PCI-capable hospitals to PCI-capable hospitals. Thus, the risk of maintaining a DIDO time within 30 min is not clear. The American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines previously recommended that the DIDO time be <30 min in the timeline for transport from non-PCI-capable hospitals to PCI-capable hospitals. 3, 8 Wang et al 6 reported that the median DIDO time from non-PCI-capable hospitals to PCI-capable hospitals was 

YAMAGUCHI J et al.

None.

the effect of DIDO time on outcomes cannot be ignored in the US and other countries. Conversely, in Japan, especially in urban areas, there are many facilities located within a short distance that can provide primary PCI for STEMI. It is necessary to note that the effect of DIDO time on outcomes may differ in Japan from that in other countries. In addition: (1) a unique system has not been constructed to verify, in Japan, whether 30 min is appropriate as the time to make a diagnosis, stabilize the condition, or confirm transfer to another hospital at a non-PCI-capable hospital;

(2) the significance of shortening DIDO time is not sufficiently recognized by practicing clinicians; and (3) concrete methods for shortening door-to-ECG time are insufficient, meaning that many issues remain to be overcome.

The results of this analysis should be interpreted in light of some significant limitations. First, this analysis consisted of only 2 retrospective cohort studies identified from a search of PubMed. One of these studies had a small sample size, 7 meaning that the point estimate of this paper may be affected by another study with relatively large sample size. Information about time intervals and patient characteristics was ascertained through a retrospective chart review, and these records could not be independently validated. Moreover, the role of confounding variables in our analysis is unknown. Second, the primary endpoint was shortterm (30-day and in-hospital) mortality. We could not examine the number of patients who survived for more than 30 days or died during the index hospitalization. Third, critical factors that would affect clinical outcomes and STEMI severity (e.g., age, past medical history, Killip class, vital signs, including blood pressure on admission, and detailed PCI strategy) were not assessed in detail in the present analysis. The group with a DIDO time >30 min was older, had a higher proportion of females, and had a higher frequency of hypertension and previous stroke than those the group with a DIDO time ≤30 min. These differences could have influenced the present results. Finally, detailed information about the non-PCI-capable hospitals is lacking, but could have affected the diagnosis of STEMI and decisions regarding transfer.

This meta-analysis suggests that a DIDO time ≤30 min is associated with lower short-term mortality rates. However, further systematic reviews and meta-analyses that include more studies are needed to validate our findings.

Primary angioplasty versus intravenous thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction: A quantitative review of 23 randomised trials

One-year outcome after percutaneous coronary intervention for acute coronary syndrome: An analysis of 20,042 patients from a Japanese nationwide registry

focused updates: ACC/AHA guidelines for the management of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (updating the 2004 guideline and 2007 focused update) and ACC/AHA/SCAI guidelines on percutaneous coronary intervention (updating the 2005 guideline and 2007 focused update) a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/ American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines

Association of onset to balloon and door to balloon time with long term clinical outcome in patients with ST elevation acute myocardial infarction having primary percutaneous coronary intervention: Observational study

National performance on door-in to door-out time among patients transferred for primary percutaneous coronary intervention

Association of door-in to door-out time with reperfusion delays and outcomes among patients transferred for primary percutaneous coronary intervention

Factors associated with door-in to door-out delays among ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients transferred for primary percutaneous coronary intervention: A population-based cohort study in Ontario, Canada

ACC/AHA 2008 performance measures for adults with ST-elevation and non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction: A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Performance Measures (Writing Committee to Develop Performance Measures for ST-Elevation and Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction) developed in collaboration with the American Academy of Family Physicians and American College of Emergency Physicians endorsed by the American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and Society of Hospital Medicine

Causes of delay and associated mortality in patients transferred with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction

Transfer of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction for primary percutaneous coronary intervention: A province-wide evaluation of "door-in to door-out" delays at the first hospital

Minimizing transfer time to an ST segment elevation myocardial infarction-receiving center: A modified Delphi consensus. Door-In to Door-Out Time and STEMI

guideline on diagnosis and treatment of acute coronary syndrome

ACC/AHA/SCAI focused update on primary percutaneous coronary intervention for patients with STelevation myocardial infarction: An update of the 2011 ACCF/ AHA/SCAI guideline for percutaneous coronary intervention and the 2013 ACCF/AHA guideline for the management of STelevation myocardial infarction: A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines and the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on door-to-balloon time for primary percutaneous coronary intervention: Results from the Singapore Western STEMI Network

The NCDR ACTION Registry-GWTG: Transforming contemporary acute myocardial infarction clinical care

Association between hospital practices and door-in-door-out time in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction

The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: Explanation and elaboration

Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement

Systems for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations I: Critical appraisal of existing approaches. The GRADE Working Group

Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations

The GRADE approach is reproducible in assessing the quality of evidence of quantitative evidence syntheses

GRADE guidelines: A new series of articles in the Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Assessing heterogeneity in meta-analysis: Q statistic or I 2 index?

All authors participated in the study design. J.Y. and T.M. identified the studies included in the meta-analysis and analyzed the data. J.Y., T.M., and Y.M. drafted the manuscript. Y.T., M.K., T.M., and H.N. reviewed the manuscript. All authors participated in the data interpretation and discussion. All authors had full access to all data (including statistical reports and tables) in the study and take responsibility for its integrity, the accuracy of the analysis, and review and approval of the final manuscript.

The authors thank the Japan Council for Quality Health Care (Minds Tokyo GRADE Center) staff and Morio Aihara for their help implementing the GRADE approach. The authors also thank Editage (www.editage.com) for English language editing.

Funding was provided by the Japan Resuscitation Council and the Japanese Circulation Society Emergency and Critical Care Committee.

T. Matoba is a member of Circulation Reports' Editorial Team. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare concerning this article.