Key result
Stent for Life initiative linked to a ~14-point increase in emergency medical service activation.
Why the study?
The Stent for Life/Stent Save a Life programme aimed to reduce STEMI treatment delays and increase PPCI access in Portugal, necessitating continuous monitoring of reperfusion times, key performance indicators, and regional variations from 2011–2025.
Does the Stent for Life/Stent Save a Life programme improve reperfusion times, INEM activation, and guideline target compliance in patients with STEMI in Portugal from 2011 to 2025?
Observational (n=1,901)
Yes
Does the Stent for Life/Stent Save a Life programme improve reperfusion times, INEM activation, and guideline target compliance in patients with STEMI in Portugal from 2011 to 2025?
Over the 2011–2025 SFL/SSL initiative in Portugal, emergency medical service (INEM) activation increased and initial admission to non-PPCI hospitals markedly decreased, though overall patient/system delays and regional inequalities in STEMI care persist.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Associated with improved EMS activation and PPCI access; extends Stent for Life evaluation but leaves outcome benefits open.
Introduction The Stent for Life/Stent Save a Life (SFL/SSL) programme, launched in 2011, aimed to reduce delays in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) treatment and increase access to primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI). Momento 25 provides a new national assessment of the Portuguese PPCI network. This study compares key performance indicators from 2011–2025, identifies opportunities for improvement and highlights the importance of continuous monitoring of reperfusion times, including critical intervals, operational targets and regional variations. Methods Data from Moments 0–6 (M6, n=1652) and Moment 25 (M25, n=249) were analysed. Variables included patient delay (symptom-to-FMC), system delay (FMC-to-reperfusion), FMC-to-ECG, type of first medical contact (INEM vs self-transport), compliance with guideline targets (ECG ≤10 min; door-to-balloon ≤60 min; FMC-to-balloon ≤90 min; symptom-to-balloon ≤120 min) and initial admission to centres with and without PPCI. Results No significant differences were found for patient or system delay. Overall compliance with guideline-recommended timings also showed no significant changes, although Moment 25 recorded the highest door-to-balloon performance (59.6%). INEM activation increased steadily across study periods, from 35.2% in Moment 0 to 49.4% in Moment 25 (p<0.001). Significant differences in target compliance were observed between patients with and without INEM activation (Table 1). A marked reduction in initial admission to non-PPCI hospitals was noted, from 54.5% in Moment 0 to 28.9% in Moment 25 (p<0.001). Regional disparities persisted, with presentation to non-PPCI centres ranging from 36.5% in Lisbon and Tagus Valley to 54.3% in Alentejo. Conclusions Throughout the SFL/SSL initiative, sustained growth in INEM activation was observed, accompanied by improved network efficiency, reflected in higher proportions of patients reperfused within ≤90 min, and reduced admission to hospitals without interventional cardiology. However, significant delays and regional inequalities persist, compromising equitable access to PPCI. Strengthening cardiovascular emergency literacy, encouraging early INEM activation and reorganising regional networks are essential to improve and consolidate the gains achieved.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Martins et al. (2026) conducted an observational in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) (n=1,901). Stent for Life/Stent Save a Life (SFL/SSL) initiative (Moment 25) vs. Earlier assessment periods (Moments 0-6) was evaluated on INEM emergency medical service activation and initial admission to non-PPCI hospitals (p=<0.001). The Stent for Life initiative increased emergency medical service activation from 35.2% to 49.4% (p<0.001) and reduced non-PPCI hospital admissions from 54.5% to 28.9% (p<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: