The goal of therapy for bradycardia or tachycardia is to rapidly identify and treat patients who are hemodynamically unstable or symptomatic due to the arrhythmia. Drugs or, when appropriate, pacing may be used to control unstable or symptomatic bradycardia. Cardioversion or drugs or both may be used to control unstable or symptomatic tachycardia. ACLS providers should closely monitor stable patients pending expert consultation and should be prepared to aggressively treat those with evidence of decompensation.

Clinical case: A 58-year-old woman called 9-1-1 with acute onset of chest pain that had persisted for 30 minutes. She had a history of hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and type 2 diabetes mellitus but no previous history of myocardial infarction or heart failure. Her medications included aspirin, atorvastatin, lisinopril, and metoprolol. Paramedics were dispatched, and a prehospital ECG demonstrated 3-to 4-mm ST-segment elevation in leads I, aVL, and V 2 through V 6 (Figure 1). Her examination revealed a regular pulse of 90 bpm, a blood pressure of 100/60 mm Hg, clear lungs, and normal heart sounds with no murmurs. Paramedics interpreted the prehospital ECG and activated the catheterization laboratory en route to the hospital. On hospital arrival, the patient was transported directly to the catheterization laboratory. Coronary angiography demonstrated an occluded proximal left anterior descending artery, which was successfully treated with balloon angioplasty and a stent. The pertinent time intervals were as follows: paramedic dispatch to balloon time, 56 minutes; paramedic arrival at the scene to balloon time, 46 minutes; hospital door to balloon time, 23 minutes. Her biomarkers revealed a peak troponin T of 2.42 ng/mL and a peak creatine kinase muscle-brain isoenzyme of 26.8 ng/mL. An echocardiogram demonstrated normal left ventricular ejection fraction of 55%, with mild anterior hypokinesis, and the patient was discharged on hospital day 3. Current Guidelines for Prehospital ECGs Among Patients With ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial InfarctionAmerican Heart Association national guidelines, 1-3 as well as other consensus and scientific statements, 4 -11 recommend that emergency medical services (EMS) acquire and use prehospital ECGs to evaluate patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome. Despite these recommendations, prehospital ECGs are used in fewer than 10% of patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), 12,13 and this rate has not substantially changed since the mid1990s. Furthermore, even when a prehospital ECG is acquired, the information is often not effectively translated into action and coordinated with hospital systems of care to decrease delays in reperfusion therapy. 13 The purpose of this article is to summarize evidence concerning the benefits of using prehospital ECGs, review barriers and challenges to routine use, and recommend approaches to enhance their effectiveness for improving quality of care for patients with acute coronary syndromes.The American Heart Association makes every effort to avoid any actual or potential conflicts of interest that may arise as a result of an outside relationship or a personal, professional, or business interest of a member of the writing panel. Specifically, all members of the writing group are required to complete and submit a Disclosure Questionnaire showing all such relationships that might be perceived as real or potential conflicts of interest.

No abstract

The safety and findings of cardiac catheterization and coronary angiography in morbidly obese patients with suspected coronary heart disease (CHD) have not been fully examined in the modern era. From a database of 4,978 patients undergoing diagnostic cardiac catheterization, we identified 110 with morbid obesity (body mass > or = 145 kg and body mass index > or = 40 kg/m(2)). Relative to all the other patients in this database, morbidly obese patients had a lower prevalence of CHD (45% vs. 72%; P < 0.05), reflecting a higher prevalence of false positive noninvasive tests. Overall, noninvasive tests were only 75% sensitive and 39% specific for CHD in this group. Use of radial access (66%) and femoral closure devices (24%) was much more frequent in the morbidly obese cohort. Complications were no more frequent in the morbidly obese group, with major (0 vs. 0.9%) and minor (4.7% vs. 3.5%) adverse outcomes being similar to the rest of the database. We conclude that cardiac catheterization using the radial artery or a femoral closure device is a safe and effective method of evaluating CHD in morbidly obese patients. In contrast, noninvasive testing is frequently not definitive and may be misleading.

No abstract