Author + information
- Received May 1, 1992
- Revision received October 12, 1992
- Accepted January 23, 1993
- Published online August 1, 1993.
- Expedito E. Ribeiro, MD∗,1,
- Lelio A. Silva, MD1,
- Rinaldo Carneiro, MD1,
- Laio G. D'oliveira, MD1,
- Amauri Gasquez, MD1,
- JosèG. Amino, MD1,
- JoséR. Tavares, MD1,
- Antonia Petrizzo, MD1,
- Sergio Torossian, MD1,
- Renato Duprat Fo−, MD1,
- Énio Buffolo, MD1 and
- Stephen G. Ellis, MD, FACC∗
- ↵∗Address for correspondence: Expedito E. Ribeiro, MD, Unicór Hospital Av. Sāo Gabriel, 359,01435 Sāo Paulo, Brazil.
Objectives. The objective of this study was to obtain preliminary data on the relative clinical utility of direct coronary angioplasty compared with that of intravenous thrombolytic therapy for patients with acute myocardial infarction.
Background. The relative merits of intravenous thrombolytic therapy and direct coronary angioplasty as treatment for acute myocardial infarction are incompletely understood, and randomized trials of these treatments have been extremely limited.
Methods. One hundred patients with ST segment elevation presenting to a single high volume interventional center within 6 h of the onset of chest pain were randomized to receive either streptokinase (1.2 million U intravenously over 1 h) or immediate catheterization and direct coronary angioplasty. Patients were excluded for age ≥75 years, prior bypass surgery, Q wave infarction in the region of ischemia or excessive risk of bleeding. All patients were then treated with aspirin (325 mg orally/day) and heparin (1,000 U intravenously/h) for 48 h until catheterization was performed to determine the primary study end point, namely, infarct-related artery patency at 48 h. Secondary end points were in-hospital death, left ventricular ejection fraction at 48 h and time to treatment.
Results. There was no difference in the baseline characteristics of the two treatment groups. Overall patient age was 56 ± 10 years, 83% of patients were male, 11% had prior infarction, 40% had anterior infarction and 97% were in Killip class I or II. Although time to treatment was delayed in the angioplasty group (238 ± 112 vs. 179 ± 98 min, p = 0.005), there was no difference in 48-h infarct-related artery patency or left ventricular ejection fraction (patency 74% vs. 80%; ejection fraction 59 ± 13% vs. 57 ± 13%; angioplasty vs. streptokinase, p = NS for both). There were no major bleeding events, and the mortality rate with angioplasty (6%) and streptokinase (2%) did not differ (p = NS).
Conclusions. These results suggest that intravenous thrombolytic therapy might be preferred over coronary angioplasty for most patients because of the often shorter time to treatment.
- Received May 1, 1992.
- Revision received October 12, 1992.
- Accepted January 23, 1993.