Advertisement

Is There Still a Role for Fibrinolysis in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction?

  • C. El Khoury
  • F. Sibellas
  • E. BonnefoyEmail author
Coronary Artery Disease (PG Steg, Section Editor)

Opinion statement

Fibrinolysis had long been the reference treatment in patients with ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI). It was associated with a large reduction in mortality as compared with delayed or no reperfusion in patients managed early, within the first 2 hours from the onset of symptoms. Fibrinolysis also had well-known potential complications: cerebral haemorrhage, especially in patients beyond 75 years, and reinfarction. Primary percutaneous intervention (PCI) has overcome most of these limitations, but at a price: PCI-related delays that can reduce the expected benefit of primary PCI compared with fibrinolysis. That primary PCI is today the treatment of choice in patients with STEMI is no longer discussed. However, fibrinolysis should still maintain a role in the management of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) for three reasons. First, fibrinolysis is no longer a stand-alone treatment. Modern fibrinolytic strategies combine immediate fibrinolysis, loading dose of thienopyridines, and transfer to a PCI hospital for rescue or early PCI within 24 hours. These strategies capitalize on the hub-and-spoke networks that have, or should have, been built everywhere to implement primary PCI. The overall clinical results of these modern fibrinolytic strategies are now similar to those of primary PCI. Second, a substantial number of patients cannot be managed with primary PCI within the reasonable time thresholds set by the guidelines. In the case of long PCI-related delays, patients will benefit from fibrinolysis before or during transfer to a PCI hospital. Third, modern fibrinolytic strategies—immediate fibrinolysis followed by rescue or early PCI—may even offer the best results of all in a subset of patients. Patients of less than 75 years, managed within the first 2 hours and who cannot have immediate PCI, will fare better with a modern fibrinolytic strategy than with primary PCI. Guidelines advocate regional networks between hospitals with and without PCI capabilities, an efficient ambulance service and standardization of AMI management through shared protocols. These regional logistics of care are essential to take full advantage of fibrinolysis strategies. In order to check that these strategies are correctly applied, networks need ongoing registries, as well as benchmarking and quality improvement initiatives.

Keywords

Acute myocardial infarction Thrombolysis Fibrinolysis Networks Guidelines Streptokinase Tenecteplase Reteplase Alteplase Pharmaco-invasive angioplasty Rescue angioplasty Facilitated angioplasty Reperfusion delays STEMI 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to Dr Mikhail Altman for his help in editing the manuscript.

Disclosures

C. El Khoury: none; F. Sibellas: none; E. Bonnefoy: Payment for development of education presentations and has had travel/accommodation expenses covered by Boehringer Ingelheim

References and Recommended Reading

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. 1.
    Ouriel K. A history of thrombolytic therapy. J Endovasc Ther. 2004;11 Suppl 2:II128–33.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    GISSI. Effectiveness of intravenous thrombolytic treatment in acute myocardial infarction. Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Streptochinasi nell’Infarto Miocardico (GISSI). Lancet. 1986;1:397–402.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    ISIS-2. Randomised trial of intravenous streptokinase, oral aspirin, both, or neither among 17,187 cases of suspected acute myocardial infarction: ISIS-2. ISIS-2 (Second International Study of Infarct Survival) Collaborative Group. Lancet. 1988;2:349–60.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    GUSTO. An international randomized trial comparing four thrombolytic strategies for acute myocardial infarction. The GUSTO investigators. N Engl J Med. 1993;329:673–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Van De Werf F, Adgey J, Ardissino D, et al. Single-bolus tenecteplase compared with front-loaded alteplase in acute myocardial infarction: the ASSENT-2 double-blind randomised trial. Lancet. 1999;354:716–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gusto III. A comparison of reteplase with alteplase for acute myocardial infarction. The Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Coronary Arteries (GUSTO III) Investigators. N Engl J Med. 1997;337:1118–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    InTIme-II. Intravenous NPA for the treatment of infarcting myocardium early; InTIME-II, a double-blind comparison of single-bolus lanoteplase vs accelerated alteplase for the treatment of patients with acute myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J. 2000;21:2005–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    FTT. Indications for fibrinolytic therapy in suspected acute myocardial infarction: collaborative overview of early mortality and major morbidity results from all randomised trials of more than 1000 patients. Fibrinolytic Therapy Trialists’ (FTT) Collaborative Group. Lancet. 1994;343:311–22.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Boersma E, Maas AC, Deckers JW, et al. Early thrombolytic treatment in acute myocardial infarction: reappraisal of the golden hour. Lancet. 1996;348:771–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    EMIP. Prehospital thrombolytic therapy in patients with suspected acute myocardial infarction. The European Myocardial Infarction Project Group. N Engl J Med. 1993;329:383–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Morrison LJ, Verbeek PR, McDonald AC, et al. Mortality and prehospital thrombolysis for acute myocardial infarction: A meta-analysis. JAMA. 2000;283:2686–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Björklund E, Stenestrand U, Lindbäck J, et al. Pre-hospital thrombolysis delivered by paramedics is associated with reduced time delay and mortality in ambulance-transported real-life patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J. 2006;27:1146–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Huynh T, Birkhead J, Huber K, et al. The pre-hospital fibrinolysis experience in Europe and North America and implications for wider dissemination. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2011;4:877–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Taher T, Fu Y, Wagner GS, et al. Aborted myocardial infarction in patients with ST-segment elevation: insights from the Assessment of the Safety and Efficacy of a New Thrombolytic Regimen-3 Trial Electrocardiographic Substudy. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;44:38–43.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ross AM, Coyne KS, Moreyra E, et al. Extended mortality benefit of early postinfarction reperfusion. GUSTO-I Angiographic Investigators. Global Utilization of Streptokinase and Tissue Plasminogen Activator for Occluded Coronary Arteries Trial. Circulation. 1998;97:1549–56.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mehta SR, Eikelboom JW, Yusuf S. Risk of intracranial haemorrhage with bolus versus infusion thrombolytic therapy: a meta-analysis. Lancet. 2000;356:449–54.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    ISIS-3: a randomised comparison of streptokinase vs tissue plasminogen activator vs anistreplase and of aspirin plus heparin vs aspirin alone among 41,299 cases of suspected acute myocardial infarction. ISIS-3 (Third International Study of Infarct Survival) Collaborative Group. Lancet. 1992;339:753–70.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gurwitz JH, Gore JM, Goldberg RJ, et al. Risk for intracranial haemorrhage after tissue plasminogen activator treatment for acute myocardial infarction. Participants in the National Registry of Myocardial Infarction 2. Ann Intern Med. 1998;129:597–604.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gore JM, Granger CB, Simoons ML, et al. Stroke after thrombolysis. Mortality and functional outcomes in the GUSTO-I trial. Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Coronary Arteries. Circulation. 1995;92:2811–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Van de Werf F, Barron HV, Armstrong PW, et al. Incidence and predictors of bleeding events after fibrinolytic therapy with fibrin-specific agents: a comparison of TNK-tPA and rt-PA. Eur Heart J. 2001;22:2253–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Barbash GI, Birnbaum Y, Bogaerts K, et al. Treatment of reinfarction after thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction: an analysis of outcome and treatment choices in the global utilization of streptokinase and tissue plasminogen activator for occluded coronary arteries (gusto I) and assessment of the safety of a new thrombolytic (assent 2) studies. Circulation. 2001;103:954–60.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Topol EJ. Reperfusion therapy for acute myocardial infarction with fibrinolytic therapy or combination reduced fibrinolytic therapy and platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibition: the GUSTO V randomised trial. Lancet. 2001;357:1905–14.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    ASSENT-3. Efficacy and safety of tenecteplase in combination with enoxaparin, abciximab, or unfractionated heparin: the ASSENT-3 randomised trial in acute myocardial infarction. Lancet. 2001;358:605–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sabatine MS, Cannon CP, Gibson CM, et al. Addition of clopidogrel to aspirin and fibrinolytic therapy for myocardial infarction with ST-segment elevation. N Engl J Med. 2005;352:1179–89.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    GUSTO IIb. A clinical trial comparing primary coronary angioplasty with tissue plasminogen activator for acute myocardial infarction. The Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Coronary Arteries in Acute Coronary Syndromes (GUSTO IIb) Angioplasty Substudy Investigators. N Engl J Med. 1997;336:1621–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Andersen HR, Nielsen TT, Rasmussen K, et al. A comparison of coronary angioplasty with fibrinolytic therapy in acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 2003;349:733–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Widimský P, Budesínský T, Vorác D, et al. Long distance transport for primary angioplasty vs immediate thrombolysis in acute myocardial infarction. Final results of the randomized national multicentre trial—PRAGUE-2. Eur Heart J. 2003;24:94–104.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Keeley EC, Boura JA, Grines CL. Primary angioplasty versus intravenous thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction: a quantitative review of 23 randomised trials. Lancet. 2003;361:13–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Nordmann AJ, Hengstler P, Harr T, et al. Clinical outcomes of primary stenting versus balloon angioplasty in patients with myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Am J Med. 2004;116:253–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Montalescot G, Antoniucci D, Kastrati A, et al. Abciximab in primary coronary stenting of ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a European meta-analysis on individual patients’ data with long-term follow-up. Eur Heart J. 2007;28:443–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Stone GW, Maehara A, Witzenbichler B, et al. Intracoronary abciximab and aspiration thrombectomy in patients with large anterior myocardial infarction: the INFUSE-AMI randomized trial. JAMA. 2012;307:1817–26.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Vlaar PJ, Svilaas T, van der Horst IC, et al. Cardiac death and reinfarction after 1 year in the Thrombus Aspiration during Percutaneous coronary intervention in Acute myocardial infarction Study (TAPAS): a 1-year follow-up study. Lancet. 2008;371:1915–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.•
    Jolly SS, Yusuf S, Cairns J, et al. Radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography and intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes (RIVAL): a randomised, parallel group, multicentre trial. Lancet. 2011;377:1409–20. This randomized study demonstrated that a radial approach was as effective as a femoral approach for PCI. There was a lower rate of local vascular complications especially in patients with STEMI.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.••
    Steg PG, James SK, Atar D, et al. ESC Guidelines for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation: The Task Force on the management of ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur Heart J. Published Online First: 24 Août 2012. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehs215. The new guidelines of the European Society of Cardiology present, comment, and class all available evidences on the management of STEMI. For Europeans, this large report is the most up-to-date and authoritative text on the topic. Even if all the recommendations are not applicable for an American audience, it remains worthwhile to consult and read.
  35. 35.
    Calvert PA, Steg PG. Towards evidence-based percutaneous coronary intervention: The Rene Laennec lecture in clinical cardiology. Eur Heart J. 2012;33:1878–85.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Thune JJ, Hoefsten DE, Lindholm MG, et al. Simple risk stratification at admission to identify patients with reduced mortality from primary angioplasty. Circulation. 2005;112:2017–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Morrow DA, Antman EM, Parsons L, et al. Application of the TIMI risk score for ST-elevation MI in the National Registry of Myocardial Infarction 3. JAMA. 2001;286:1356–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Francone M, Bucciarelli-Ducci C, Carbone I, et al. Impact of primary coronary angioplasty delay on myocardial salvage, infarct size, and microvascular damage in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: insight from cardiovascular magnetic resonance. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;54:2145–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Pinto DS, Kirtane AJ, Nallamothu BK, et al. Hospital delays in reperfusion for ST-elevation myocardial infarction: implications when selecting a reperfusion strategy. Circulation. 2006;114:2019–25.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    De Luca G, Suryapranata H, Ottervanger JP, et al. Time delay to treatment and mortality in primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction: every minute of delay counts. Circulation. 2004;109:1223–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Nallamothu BK, Bates ER, Herrin J, et al. Times to treatment in transfer patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention in the United States: National Registry of Myocardial Infarction (NRMI)-3/4 analysis. Circulation. 2005;111:761–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Danchin N, Coste P, Ferrières J, et al. Comparison of thrombolysis followed by broad use of percutaneous coronary intervention with primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment-elevation acute myocardial infarction: data from the french registry on acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (FAST-MI). Circulation. 2008;118:268–76.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Kalla K, Christ G, Karnik R, et al. Implementation of guidelines improves the standard of care: the Viennese registry on reperfusion strategies in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (Vienna STEMI registry). Circulation. 2006;113:2398–405.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Jollis JG, Roettig ML, Aluko AO, et al. Implementation of a statewide system for coronary reperfusion for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. JAMA. 2007;298:2371–80.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Jollis JG, Al-Khalidi HR, Monk L, et al. Expansion of a Regional ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction System to an Entire State. Circulation. 2012;126:189–95.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Chazov EI, Matveeva LS, Mazaev AV, et al. Intracoronary administration of fibrinolysin in acute myocardial infarct. Ter Arkh. 1976;48:8–19.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Gersh BJ, Stone GW, White HD, et al. Pharmacological facilitation of primary percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction: is the slope of the curve the shape of the future? JAMA. 2005;293:979–86.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Anderson JL, Karagounis LA, Califf RM. Metaanalysis of five reported studies on the relation of early coronary patency grades with mortality and outcomes after acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol. 1996;78:1–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Wijeysundera HC, Vijayaraghavan R, Nallamothu BK, et al. Rescue angioplasty or repeat fibrinolysis after failed fibrinolytic therapy for ST-segment myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;49:422–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Sutton AGC, Campbell PG, Graham R, et al. A randomized trial of rescue angioplasty versus a conservative approach for failed fibrinolysis in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: the Middlesbrough Early Revascularization to Limit INfarction (MERLIN) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;44:287–96.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.•
    Carver A, Rafelt S, Gershlick AH, et al. Longer-term follow-up of patients recruited to the REACT (Rescue Angioplasty Versus Conservative Treatment or Repeat Thrombolysis) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;54:118–26. Long-term follow-up of the landmark REACT trial. This study showed that rescue PCI was superior to both repeat thrombolysis and conservative therap. Benefit is maintained at one year in terms of mortality.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Desch S, Eitel I, Rahimi K, et al. Timing of invasive treatment after fibrinolysis in ST elevation myocardial infarction–a meta-analysis of immediate or early routine versus deferred or ischemia-guided randomised controlled trials. Heart. 2010;96:1695–702.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Bonnefoy E, Lapostolle F, Leizorovicz A, et al. Primary angioplasty versus prehospital fibrinolysis in acute myocardial infarction: a randomised study. Lancet. 2002;360:825–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Armstrong PW. A comparison of pharmacologic therapy with/without timely coronary intervention vs. primary percutaneous intervention early after ST-elevation myocardial infarction: the WEST (Which Early ST-elevation myocardial infarction Therapy) study. Eur Heart J. 2006;27:1530–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    ASSENT-4. Primary versus tenecteplase-facilitated percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction (ASSENT-4 PCI): randomised trial. Lancet. 2006;367:569–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Thiele H, Eitel I, Meinberg C, et al. Randomized comparison of pre-hospital-initiated facilitated percutaneous coronary intervention versus primary percutaneous coronary intervention in acute myocardial infarction very early after symptom onset: the LIPSIA-STEMI trial (Leipzig immediate prehospital facilitated angioplasty in ST-segment myocardial infarction). JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2011;4:605–14.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Zalewski J, Bogaerts K, Desmet W, et al. Intraluminal thrombus in facilitated versus primary percutaneous coronary intervention: an angiographic substudy of the ASSENT-4 PCI (Assessment of the Safety and Efficacy of a New Treatment Strategy with Percutaneous Coronary Intervention) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;57:1867–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Huisse M-G, Ajzenberg N, Feldman L, et al. Microparticle-linked tissue factor activity and increased thrombin activity play a potential role in fibrinolysis failure in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Thromb Haemost. 2009;101:734–40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Gurbel PA, Serebruany VL, Shustov AR, et al. Effects of reteplase and alteplase on platelet aggregation and major receptor expression during the first 24 hours of acute myocardial infarction treatment. GUSTO-III Investigators. Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Coronary Arteries. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1998;31:1466–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Ellis SG, Tendera M, de Belder MA, et al. Facilitated PCI in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:2205–17.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Dimopoulos K, Dudek D, Piscione F, et al. Timing of events in STEMI patients treated with immediate PCI or standard medical therapy: implications on optimisation of timing of treatment from the CARESS-in-AMI trial. Int J Cardiol. 2012;154:275–81.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Di Mario C, Dudek D, Piscione F, et al. Immediate angioplasty versus standard therapy with rescue angioplasty after thrombolysis in the Combined Abciximab REteplase Stent Study in Acute Myocardial Infarction (CARESS-in-AMI): an open, prospective, randomised, multicentre trial. Lancet. 2008;371:559–68.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.•
    Cantor WJ, Fitchett D, Borgundvaag B, et al. Routine early angioplasty after fibrinolysis for acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:2705–18. In patients managed in a non-PCI hospital with fibrinolysis, a strategy of immediate transfer to PCI within 6 hours was associated with fewer ischemic complications than was standard treatment.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Borgia F, Goodman SG, Halvorsen S, et al. Early routine percutaneous coronary intervention after fibrinolysis vs. standard therapy in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis. Eur Heart J. 2010;31:2156–69.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    D’Souza SP, Mamas MA, Fraser DG, et al. Routine early coronary angioplasty versus ischaemia-guided angioplasty after thrombolysis in acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis. Eur Heart J. 2011;32:972–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Zeymer U, Arntz H-R, Dirks B, et al. Reperfusion rate and inhospital mortality of patients with ST segment elevation myocardial infarction diagnosed already in the prehospital phase: results of the German Prehospital Myocardial Infarction Registry (PREMIR). Resuscitation. 2009;80:402–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.•
    Steg PG, Bonnefoy E, Chabaud S, et al. Impact of time to treatment on mortality after prehospital fibrinolysis or primary angioplasty: data from the CAPTIM randomized clinical trial. Circulation. 2003;108:2851–6. This analysis of the CAPTIM study assessed the interaction of delay with the reperfusion strategies. Prehospital thrombolysis with transfer to an interventional facility (and, if needed, percutaneous intervention) may be preferable to primary PCI for patients treated within the first 2 hours after symptom onset.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.•
    Bonnefoy E, Steg PG, Boutitie F, et al. Comparison of primary angioplasty and pre-hospital fibrinolysis in acute myocardial infarction (CAPTIM) trial: a 5-year follow-up. Eur Heart J. 2009;30:1598–606. The 5-year follow-up of the CAPTIM study shows that for patients included within 2 h of a STEMI, 5-year mortality was lower with a strategy of pre-hospital lysis followed by transfer to an interventional center than with primary PCI.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.•
    Puymirat E, Simon T, Steg PG, et al. Association of Changes in Clinical Characteristics and Management With Improvement in Survival Among Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction. JAMA. 2012;308:1–8. This article presents an analysis of four 1-month French nationwide registries, conducted 5 years apart from 1995 to 2010. It assessed changes over time in 30-day mortality.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Danchin N, Blanchard D, Steg PG, et al. Impact of prehospital thrombolysis for acute myocardial infarction on 1-year outcome: results from the French Nationwide USIC 2000 Registry. Circulation. 2004;110:1909–15.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Danchin N, Durand E, Blanchard D. Pre-hospital thrombolysis in perspective. Eur Heart J. 2008;29:2835–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Ting HH, Rihal CS, Gersh BJ, et al. Regional systems of care to optimize timeliness of reperfusion therapy for ST-elevation myocardial infarction: the Mayo Clinic STEMI Protocol. Circulation. 2007;116:729–36.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Armstrong PW, Gershlick A, Goldstein P, et al. The Strategic Reperfusion Early After Myocardial Infarction (STREAM) study. Am Heart J. 2010;160(1):30–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    White H. Thrombin-specific anticoagulation with bivalirudin versus heparin in patients receiving fibrinolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction: the HERO-2 randomised trial. Lancet. 2001;358:1855–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.•
    The Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project. Report 2011. http://www.hqip.org.uk/assets/NCAPOP-Library/MINAP-public-report-2011.pdf. This is the last report of the MINAP project. This important document describes the evolution of STEMI management until 2010 and the effects of an active strategy prioritizing primary PCI in England and Wales.
  76. 76.
    Lambert L, Brown K, Segal E, et al. Association between timeliness of reperfusion therapy and clinical outcomes in ST-elevation myocardial infarction. JAMA. 2010;303:2148–55.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Schiele F, Meneveau N, Seronde MF, et al. Compliance with guidelines and 1-year mortality in patients with acute myocardial infarction: a prospective study. Eur Heart J. 2005;26:873–80.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Intensive and Coronary Care UnitCardio-Vascular University HospitalLyonFrance

Personalised recommendations