Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Characteristics and outcome of patients with ST-elevation infarction in relation to whether they received thrombolysis or underwent acute coronary angiography: are we selecting the right patients for coronary angiography?
[external].
Show others and affiliations
2003 (English)In: Clinical Cardiology, ISSN 0160-9289, E-ISSN 1932-8737, Vol. 26, no 2, 78-84 p.Article in journal (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

BACKGROUND: During the last decade, there has been an on-going debate with regard to whether percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or thrombolysis should be preferred in patients with ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Some studies clearly advocate PCI, while others do not. HYPOTHESIS: The study aimed to describe the characteristics and to evaluate outcome of patients with suspected ST-elevation or left bundle-branch block infarction in relation to whether they received thrombolysis or had an acute coronary angiography aiming at angioplasty. METHODS: The study included all patients admitted to Sahlgrenska University Hospital in Göteborg, Sweden, with suspected acute myocardial infarction who, during 1995-1999, had ST-elevation or left bundle-branch block on admission electrocardiogram (ECG) requiring either thrombolysis or acute coronary angiography. A retrospective evaluation with a follow-up of 1 year after the intervention was made. RESULTS: In all, 413 patients had thrombolytic treatment and 400 had acute coronary angiography. The patients who received thrombolysis were older (mean age 70.3 vs. 64.1 years). Mortality during 1 year of follow-up was 20.9% in the thrombolysis group and 16.6% in the angiography group (p = 0.12). Among patients in whom acute coronary angiography was performed, only 85% underwent acute percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). There was a mortality of 12.1 vs. 41.7% among those who did not undergo acute PCI. Development of reinfarction, stroke, and requirement of rehospitalization was similar regardless of type of initial intervention. The thrombolysis group more frequently required new coronary angiography (36.9 vs. 20.6%; p<0.0001) and new PCI (17.8 vs. 11.9%; p = 0.01). Despite this, after 1 year symptoms of angina pectoris were observed in 27% of patients in the thrombolysis group and in only 14% of those in the angiography group (p = 0.0002). CONCLUSION: In a Swedish university hospital with a high volume of coronary angioplasty procedures, we found no significant difference in mortality between patients who had thrombolysis and those who underwent acute coronary angiography. However, requirement of revascularization and symptoms of angina pectoris 1 year later was considerably less frequent in those who had undergone acute coronary angiography. However, distribution of baseline characteristics was skewed and efforts should be focused on the selection of patients for the different reperfusion strategies.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
John Wiley & Sons, Inc. , 2003. Vol. 26, no 2, 78-84 p.
National Category
Medical and Health Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hb:diva-7978DOI: 10.1002/clc.4960260207Local ID: 2320/8935OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hb-7978DiVA: diva2:888861
Available from: 2015-12-22 Created: 2015-12-22

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Herlitz, Johan
In the same journal
Clinical Cardiology
Medical and Health Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Altmetric score

Total: 39 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf