CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

急性冠脉综合征

Abstract

Recommended Article

Treating Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease in ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Why, How, and When? An open-Label, 2 × 2 factorial, randomized controlled trial to evaluate the safety of apixaban vs. vitamin K antagonist and aspirin vs. placebo in patients with atrial fibrillation and acute coronary syndrome and/or percutaneous coronary intervention: Rationale and design of the AUGUSTUS trial Cardiac Shock Care Centers: JACC Review Topic of the Week Canadian SCAD Cohort Study: Shedding Light on SCAD From a United Front Acute Noncardiac Organ Failure in Acute Myocardial Infarction With Cardiogenic Shock Utility and Challenges of an Early Invasive Strategy in Patients Resuscitated From Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest 2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Coronary Artery Revascularization: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines Advances in Clinical Cardiology 2020: A Summary of Key Clinical Trials
|<<... 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 >>|

Original Research2016 Jun 15;117(12):1904-10

JOURNAL：Am J Cardiol. Article Link

Pharmacoinvasive and Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Strategies in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (from the Mayo Clinic STEMI Network)

Siontis KC, Barsness GW, Gersh BJ et al. Keywords: Pharmacoinvasive; Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Strategies in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction

ABSTRACT

The effectiveness of a pharmacoinvasive strategy consisting of fibrinolysis and transfer for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) compared to primary PCI (PPCI) in patients presenting to non-PCI-capable hospitals with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is not well defined. We analyzed data from the Mayo Clinic STEMI database of patients treated with a pharmacoinvasive strategy (favored in those presenting early after symptom onset) or PPCI in a regional STEMI network from 2004 to 2012. A total of 364 and 1,337 patients were included in the pharmacoinvasive and PPCI groups, respectively. Patients in the PPCI group were older and more frequently had cardiogenic shock at the time of presentation (12.1% vs 7.7%, p = 0.018). Death from any cause occurred in 58 (16%) and 314 (23%) patients in the pharmacoinvasive and PPCI groups, respectively (median follow-up 3.9 and 4.4 years, respectively). In multivariate analyses adjusting for age, gender, and other variables for which the 2 groups differed at baseline, there was no significant difference between the 2 strategiesfor 30-day (hazard ratio 0.66, 95% confidence interval 0.36 to 1.21) or overall mortality (hazard ratio 0.84, 95% confidence interval 0.63 to 1.12). Shorter door-to-balloon time was associated with increased effectiveness of PPCI (p for trend = 0.015), but there was no difference between the 2 strategies even when considering only the patients with door-to-balloon time in the lowest quartile. In conclusion, fibrinolysis followed by transfer for PCI represents a reasonable alternative when PPCI is not readily available especially in patients presenting early after symptom onset.


Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

>CBS CBS 2019

> CBS 2019 REGISTRATION

> CBS 2019 PROGRAM

> CBS 2019 CALL FOR SCIENCE

> CBS 2019 SPOTLIGHTS

 CBSMD

> CBSMD WEBSITE REGISTRATION

> EDUCATION CENTER

> RECOMMANDED PAPER

> TOP 10 RESEARCH PAPER

> PRE-READING

CBS 2019 CBS 2019 FACULTY Education Resource CBSMD Scientific Library
Copyright ⓒ CBS MD Nanjing China. All rights reserved. 京ICP备16025898号-11
联系我们| Top