You are here

Responses

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Coronary artery disease
Original article
Impact of call-to-balloon time on 30-day mortality in contemporary practice
Compose a Response to This Article
Compose Response

More information about text formats

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests

PLEASE NOTE:

  • A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in a BMJ journal; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed unless it is also republished as a Letter, Correspondence or as other content. Find out more about rapid responses.
  • We intend to post all responses which are approved by the Editor, within 14 days (BMJ Journals) or 24 hours (The BMJ), however timeframes cannot be guaranteed. Responses must comply with our requirements and should contribute substantially to the topic, but it is at our absolute discretion whether we publish a response, and we reserve the right to edit or remove responses before and after publication and also republish some or all in other BMJ publications, including third party local editions in other countries and languages
  • Our requirements are stated in our rapid response terms and conditions and must be read. These include ensuring that: i) you do not include any illustrative content including tables and graphs, ii) you do not include any information that includes specifics about any patients,iii) you do not include any original data, unless it has already been published in a peer reviewed journal and you have included a reference, iv) your response is lawful, not defamatory, original and accurate, v) you declare any competing interests, vi) you understand that your name and other personal details set out in our rapid response terms and conditions will be published with any responses we publish and vii) you understand that once a response is published, we may continue to publish your response and/or edit or remove it in the future.
  • By submitting this rapid response you are agreeing to our terms and conditions for rapid responses and understand that your personal data will be processed in accordance with those terms and our privacy notice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on: 25 April 2017
    Time metrics for reperfusion therapy and failure to achieve Guideline mandated times with P-PCI
    • Anthony H Gershlcik, Professor of Interventional Cardiology University Hospitals of Leicester Leicester UK LE3 9QP
    • Other Contributors:
      • Frans Van de Werf, Professor of Cardiology
      • Paul W Armstrong, Professor of Cardiology

    We read with interest the article by Varcoe et al (Heart Jan 15 th 20917) “Impact of call-to-balloon time on 30-day mortality in contemporary practice” We were not surprised by the results which indicate yet again that patients with delays to reperfusion suffer worse mortality rates - the concept of timely reperfusion in STEMI has been previously very well documented, and its importance recognised for some time. Thus de Lucca (1), Cannon (2) and others (3) reported data >10 years ago which supported the concept that mortality rates increase when important time metrics are not achieved. Time dependent infarct size is considered the cause (4)
    When the National Infarct Angioplasty Project (NIAP) was established in 2008 with the explicit aim of rolling out P-PCI in the UK, everyone involved in care of STEMI patients thought it was a good idea to go with a policy of one STEMI management strategy, for simplicity. No-one doubted that P-PCI should become the standard of care. Some (including the authors of this letter - one of whom served on NIAP) voiced concerns however that, based on the published data, achieving guideline mandated times was essential, and that this might be difficult to achieve with P-PCI in patients transferred from more rural regions. There was assurance from Department of Health that >95% of patients were “within distance” of a P-PCI centre. We tried to point out that being “within distance”, and being within the mandated times were very differe...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.