The German CPU Registry: Comparison of troponin positive to troponin negative patients

Admission heart rate in relation to presentation and prognosis in patients with acute myocardial infarction

“…In 2008, the German Society of Cardiology initiated a nationwide CPU network and certified CPUs fulfilling well-defined qualityof-care criteria for prompt identification and treatment of patients with ACS. Certified CPUs are urged to participate in the German CPU registry, which collects data on the CPU hospital stay-including, e.g., demographics, clinical presentation, laboratory and other diagnostic tests, discharge diagnoses, treatment time intervals, and outcome-and has already offered valuable insight into the quality of treatment and patients characteristics [13]. So far, 40 centers from 32 cities have provided such data, thereby allowing for a real-life database on the diagnosis and therapy of ACS in Germany.…”

Criteria of the German Society of Cardiology for the establishment of chest pain units: update 2014

“…Through their participation in a national registry [ 14 ], certified CPUs also participate in a network whose scope is to collect clinically and academically relevant data on the epidemiology, treatment, and outcome of patients with chest pain. The first data from this registry have already been published [ 15 , 16 ]. The criteria for the certification of CPUs have been revised by the DGK “Chest Pain Unit Task Force” to replace the original publication from 2008 [ 1 ].…”

On- versus off-hour care for patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction in Germany

“…Data from the CRUSADE study demonstrated longer intervals to invasive therapy in NSTEMI patients presenting outside of usual hours without a negative impact on short-term outcome [22]. Controversially, previous data from the CPU registry demonstrated, on the one hand, that troponin-positive CPU patients were more rapidly and more often treated with PCI than were troponinnegative patients, which was associated with a lower death rate, but on the other hand that there was also a low adherence to the standard of care as proposed by the ESC guidelines, although background data were not provided [23,24]. Recently, we were able to demonstrate guidelineadherent timing of invasive therapy for NSTEMI and hr-NSTE-ACS inup to85 % ofthe CPUpatients intwoexemplarysites [9].…”