Percutaneous coronary intervention has better clinical outcomes than thrombolytic therapy for people with myocardial infarction treated at hospitals without on-site cardiac surgery

2002 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 125-126
Author(s):  
Per Tornvall
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Cardiac Surgery ◽  
Thrombolytic Therapy ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary

scholarly journals Trends in clinical outcomes and survival following prehospital thrombolytic therapy given by ambulance clinicians for ST-elevation myocardial infarction in rural sub-arctic Norway

2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 8-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan Mannsverk ◽  
Terje Steigen ◽  
Harald Wang ◽  
Pål Morten Tande ◽  
Birgitte Mannsverk Dahle ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Thrombolytic Therapy ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Rural Areas ◽  
Systolic Heart Failure ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
Ambulance Personnel ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary ◽  
Over Time

Background: Prehospital thrombolytic therapy given by ambulance emergency medical services to patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) may produce earlier reperfusion than percutaneous coronary intervention. Clinical results from prehospital thrombolytic therapy in rural areas are scarce. Methods: We studied outcomes during 11 years of a prehospital thrombolytic therapy system in rural sub-arctic Norway. Ambulance personnel gave protocol basic treatment and transmitted electrocardiograms to hospital physicians who made the decision for prehospital thrombolytic therapy. The study was divided into three time periods; 2000–2003, 2004–2007 and 2008–2011. Results: A total of 385 STEMI patients received prehospital thrombolytic therapy, median patient age was 61.2 years, and 77% were men. Time saved by prehospital reperfusion therapy was 131 minutes. The proportion who got prehospital thrombolytic therapy within 2 hours of symptom onset increased from 21% in 2000–2003 to 39% in 2008–2011 ( P=0.003). The proportion who underwent coronary angiography or percutaneous coronary intervention within 24 hours of first medical contact increased from 56.4% to 95.4% ( P<0.001). Post-STEMI systolic heart failure decreased from 19.4% to 8.1% ( P=0.02), while 1-year mortality fell, non-significantly, by 50% over time to reach 5.6%. Thirteen patients suffered acute out-of-hospital cardiac arrest; all were successfully defibrillated. Ten patients had major bleeding events (2.6%). Conclusion: A decentralised prehospital thrombolytic therapy system based on ambulance personnel, telemetry and centralised 7/24 invasive diagnosis and treatment service, combined with system maturation over time, was associated with earlier reperfusion, improved clinical outcomes and better survival. Prehospital thrombolytic therapy is a feasible and safe intervention used in rural settings with long evacuation lines to percutaneous coronary intervention facilities.

Thrombolytic Therapy in the Current ERA: Myocardial Infarction and Beyond

2018 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 414-426 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Proctor ◽  
Massoud A. Leesar ◽  
Arka Chatterjee
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Cardiovascular Disease ◽  
Acute Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Thrombolytic Therapy ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Primary Pci ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary

Thrombolytic therapy kick-started the era of modern cardiology but in the last few decades it has been largely supplanted by primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) as the go-to treatment for acute myocardial infarction. However, these agents remain important for vast populations without access to primary PCI and acute ischemic stroke. More innovative uses have recently come up for the treatment of a variety of conditions. This article summarizes the history, evidence base and current use of thrombolytics in cardiovascular disease.

scholarly journals Association Between Smoking Status and Outcomes in ST-Segment Elevation and Non-ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ching-Hui Sia ◽  
Junsuk Ko ◽  
Huili Zheng ◽  
Andrew Ho ◽  
David Foo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Smoking Status ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
St Segment Elevation ◽  
Beneficial Effects ◽  
St Segment ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary

Abstract Smoking is one of the leading risk factors for cardiovascular diseases, including ischemic heart disease and hypertension. However, in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients, smoking has been associated with better clinical outcomes, a phenomenon termed the “smoker’s paradox.” Given the known detrimental effects of smoking on the cardiovascular system, it has been proposed that the beneficial effects of smoking on outcomes is due to age differences between smokers and non-smokers and is therefore a smoker’s pseudoparadox. The aim of this study was to evaluate the association between smoking status and clinical outcomes in ST-segment elevation (STEMI) and non-STEMI (NSTEMI) patients treated by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), using a national multi-ethnic Asian registry. In unadjusted analyses, current smokers had better clinical outcomes following STEMI and NSTEMI. However, after adjusting for age, the protective effect of smoking was lost, confirming a smoker’s pseudoparadox. Interestingly, although current smokers had increased risk for recurrent MI within 1 year after PCI in both STEMI and NSTEMI patients, there was no increase in mortality. In summary, we confirm the existence of a smoker’s pseudoparadox in a multi-ethnic Asian cohort of STEMI and NSTEMI patients and report increased risk of recurrent MI, but not mortality, in smokers.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document