Drugs

, Volume 68, Issue 16, pp 2325–2344 | Cite as

Antithrombotic Therapies in Primary Angioplasty

Rationale, Results and Future Directions
Review Article

Abstract

Despite the improvement in outcome observed with primary angioplasty compared with thrombolysis, there is still room for improvement. Indeed, despite restoration of optimal epicardial flow in the vast majority of patients, suboptimal myocardial reperfusion is observed in a relatively large proportion. The aim of this article is to provide an up-to-date review of adjunctive antithrombotic therapy for primary angioplasty for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).

The HORIZONS trial has shown a significant reduction in mortality and major bleeding complications in patients treated with bivalirudin compared with those treated with glycoprotein (GP) IIb-IIIa inhibitors. Thus, bivalirudin may be considered as an alternative strategy to heparin plus GPIIb-IIIa inhibitors in primary angioplasty, especially in patients at high risk for bleeding complications. However, despite the negative results of the FINESSE trial, a large amount of evidence has been observed in favour of early administration of GPIIb-IIIa inhibitors, which should still be considered a reasonable strategy.

Non-responsiveness to aspirin and clopidogrel is relatively common. However, future trials are needed to evaluate whether the routine assessment for non-responsiveness and a consequent change in therapy (to higher dosages of clopidogrel or a switch to another adenosine diphosphate [ADP]-receptor antagonist) may improve clinical outcome. Even though not yet demonstrated, it is conceivable that the greatest benefits of clopidogrel may come from early administration, and that this might be considered as part of a pharmacological facilitation strategy, together with early administration of GPIIb-IIIa inhibitors. As a result of better and faster inhibition of platelet aggregation, further benefits might be expected from the early administration of one of the new oral platelet ADP-receptor antagonists.

As a consequence of the very low mortality currently achieved by primary angioplasty, additional endpoints, such as infarct size and myocardial perfusion, should be considered when exploring the potential benefits of adjunctive antithrombotic therapies in future randomized trials among patients undergoing mechanical revascularization for STEMI.

Notes

Acknowledgements

No sources of funding were used to assist in the preparation of this article. The authors have no conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the content of this review.

References

  1. 1.
    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: 13–20PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    De Luca G, Suryapranata H, Stone GW, et al. Coronary stenting versus balloon angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction: a meta-regression analysis of randomized trials. Int J Cardiol 2008; 126(1): 37–44PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    De Luca G, Suryapranata H, Stone GW, et al. Abciximab as adjunctive therapy to reperfusion in acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. JAMA 2005; 293: 1759–65PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Van de Werf F, Ardissino D, Betriu A, et al. Management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation. The Task Force on the Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J 2003; 24: 28–66PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Antman EM, Anbe DT, Armstrong PW, et al. ACC/AHA guidelines for the management of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee to Revise the 1999 Guidelines for the Management of Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction). Circulation 2004; 110: e82–292PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Libby P. Current concepts of the pathogenesis of the acute coronary syndromes. Circulation 2001; 104: 365–72PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    De Luca G, Ernst N, van’t Hof AW, et al. Predictors and clinical implications of early reinfarction after primary angioplasty for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Am Heart J 2006; 151: 1256–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dangas G, Aymong ED, Mehran R, et al. Predictors of and outcomes of early thrombosis following balloon angioplasty versus primary stenting in acute myocardial infarction and usefulness of abciximab (the CADILLAC trial). Am J Cardiol 2004 Oct 15; 94(8): 983–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Spertus JA, Kettelkamp R, Vance C, et al. Prevalence, predictors, and outcomes of premature discontinuation of thie-nopyridine therapy after drug-eluting stent placement: results from the PREMIER registry. Circulation 2006; 113: 2803–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Suryapranata H, De Luca G, van’t Hof AW, et al. Is routine stenting for acute myocardial infarction superior to balloon angioplasty? A randomised comparison in a large cohort of unselected patients. Heart 2005; 91: 641–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Antoniucci D, Migliorini A, Parodi G, et al. Abciximab-supported infarct artery stent implantation for acute myocardial infarction and long-term survival: a prospective, multicenter, randomized trial comparing infarct artery stenting plus abciximab with stenting alone. Circulation 2004; 109: 1704–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    van’t Hof AW, Liem A, Suryapranata H, et al. Angiographic assessment of myocardial reperfusion in patients treated with primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction: myocardial blush grade. Circulation 1998; 97: 2302–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Stone GW, Peterson MA, Lansky AJ, et al. Impact of normalized myocardial perfusion after successful angioplasty in acute myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol 2002; 39: 591–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    De Luca G, van’t Hof AW, Ottervanger JP, et al. Unsuccessful reperfusion in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction treated by primary angioplasty. Am Heart J 2005; 150: 557–62PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sakuma T, Leong-Poi H, Fisher NG, et al. Further insights into the no-reflow phenomenon after primary angioplasty in acute myocardial infarction: the role of microthromboemboli. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2003; 16: 15–21PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Limbruno U, De Carlo M, Pistolesi S, et al. Distal embolization during primary angioplasty: histopathologic features and predictability. Am Heart J 2005; 150: 102–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yip HK, Chen MC, Chang HW, et al. Angiographic morphologic features of infarct-related arteries and timely reperfusion in acute myocardial infarction: predictors of slow-flow and no-reflow phenomenon. Chest 2002; 122: 1322–32PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kotani J, Mintz GS, Pregowski J, et al. Volumetric intravascular ultrasound evidence that distal embolization during acute infarct intervention contributes to inadequate myocardial perfusion grade. Am J Cardiol 2003; 92: 728–32PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Stone GW, Webb J, Cox DA, et al., Enhanced Myocardial Efficacy and Recovery by Aspiration of Liberated Debris (EMERALD) Investigators. Distal microcirculatory protection during percutaneous coronary intervention in acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2005; 293: 1063–72PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Henriques JP, Zijlstra F, Ottervanger JP, et al. Incidence and clinical significance of distal embolization during primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J 2002; 23: 1112–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Napodano M, Tarantini G, Compagno S, et al. Predictors of distal embolization during direct angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction [abstract]. Am J Cardiol 2005; 96 Suppl. 7A: 5HGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    De Luca G, Suryapranata H, de Boer MJ, et al. Impact of vessel size on distal embolization, myocardial perfusion and clinical outcome in patients undergoing primary angioplasty for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. J Thromb Thrombolysis. Epub 2007 Dec 21Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Dreyer W, Michael L, West M. Neutrophil accumulation in ischemic canine myocardium: insights into the time course, distribution, and mechanism of localization during early reperfusion. Circulation 1991; 84: 400–11PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kloner RA, Giacomelli F, Alker KJ, et al. Influx of neutrophils into the walls of large epicardial coronary arteries in response to ischemia/reperfusion. Circulation 1991; 84: 1758–72PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Brown KK, Henson PM, Maclouf J, et al. Neutrophil-platelet adhesion: relative roles of platelet P-selectin and neutrophil b2 (CD18) integrins. Am J Respir Cell Mol Biol 1998; 18:100–10PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Diacovo TG, Roth SJ, Buccola JM, et al. Neutrophil rolling, arrest, and transmigration across activated, surface-adherent platelets via sequential action of P-selectin and the b2-integrin CDllb/CD 18. Blood 1996; 88: 146–7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sheikh S, Nash GB. Continuous activation and deactivation of integrin CD11b/CD18 during de novo expression enables rolling neutrophils to immobilize on platelets. Blood 1996; 87: 5040–50PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ward BJ, McCarthy A. Endothelial cell “swelling” is ischaemia and reperfusion. J Mol Cell Cardiol 1995; 27: 1293–300PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ma XL, Weyrich AS, Lefer DJ, et al. Monoclonal antibody to L-selectin attenuates neutrophil accumulation and protects ischemic reperfused cat myocardium. Circulation 1993; 88: 649–58PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Tomai F, Ribichini F, Ghini AS, et al. Elevated C-reactive protein levels and coronary microvascular dysfunction in patients with coronary artery disease. Eur Heart J 2005; 26: 2099–105PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Schindler TH, Nitzsche EU, Olschewski M. Chronic inflammation and impaired coronary vasoreactivity in patients with coronary risk factors. Circulation 2004; 110: 1069–75PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Engler RL, Schmid-Schönbein GW, Pavelec RS. Leukocyte capillary plugging in myocardial ischemia and reperfusion in the dog. Am J Pathol 1983; 111: 98–111PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Engler RL. Free radical and granulocyte-mediated injury during myocardial ischemia and reperfusion. Am J Cardiol 1989; 63 Suppl.: 19–23ECrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Wilson RF, Lesser JF, Laxson DD, et al. Intense microvascular constriction after angioplasty of acute thrombotic arterial lesions. Lancet 1989; I: 807–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Golino P, Piscione F, Willerson JT, et al. Divergent effects of serotonin on coronary-artery dimensions and blood flow in patients with coronary atherosclerosis and control patients. N Engl J Med 1991; 324: 641–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Topol EJ, Yadav JS. Recognition of the importance of embolization in atherosclerotic vascular disease. Circulation 2000; 101: 570–80PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Coller BS. Potential non-glycoprotein IIb/IIIa effects of abciximab. Am Heart J 1999; 138: Sl–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Schwarz M, Nordt T, Bode C, et al. The GP IIb/IIIa inhibitor abciximab (c7E3) inhibits the binding of various ligands to the leukocyte integrin Mac-1 (CDllb/CD18, alphaMbeta2). Thromb Res 2002; 107: 121–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Mason PJ, Jacobs AK, Freedman JE. Aspirin resistance and atherothrombotic disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005; 46: 986–93PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Marcucci R, Paniccia R, Antonucci E, et al. Usefulness of aspirin resistance after percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction in predicting one-year major adverse coronary events. Am J Cardiol 2006; 98: 1156–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Krasopoulos G, Brister SJ, Beattie WS, et al. Aspirin “resistance” and risk of cardiovascular morbidity: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 2008; 336(7637): 195–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Wang TH, Bhatt DL, Topol EJ. Aspirin and clopidogrel resistance: an emerging clinical entity. Eur Heart J 2006; 27: 647–54PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Buonamici P, Marcucci R, Migliorini A, et al. Impact of platelet reactivity after clopidogrel administration on drug-eluting stent thrombosis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007; 49: 2312–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Snoep JD, Hovens MM, Eikenboom JC, et al. Clopidogrel nonresponsiveness in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with stenting: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am Heart J 2007; 154: 221–31PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Cuisset T, Frere C, Quilici J, et al. Benefit of a 600-mg loading dose of clopidogrel on platelet reactivity and clinical outcomes in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome undergoing coronary stenting. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006; 48: 1339–45PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Soffer D, Moussa I, Harjai KJ, et al. Impact of angina class on inhibition of platelet aggregation following clopidogrel loading in patients undergoing coronary intervention: do we need more aggressive dosing regimens in unstable angina? Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2003; 59: 21–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Michelson AD, Linden MD, Furman MI, et al. Evidence that pre-existent variability in platelet response to ADP accounts for ‘clopidogrel resistance’. J Thromb Haemost 2007; 5: 75–81PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Gurbel PA, Bliden KP, Hiatt BL, et al. Clopidogrel for coronary stenting: response variability, drug resistance, and the effect of pretreatment platelet reactivity. Circulation 2003; 107: 2908–13PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Gurbel PA, Becker RC, Mann KG, et al. Platelet function monitoring in patients with coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007; 50: 1822–34PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Valles J, Santos MT, Aznar J, et al. Erythrocytes metabolically enhance collagen-induced platelet responsiveness via increased thromboxane production, ADP release, and recruitment. Blood 1991; 78: 154–62PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Cipollone F, Ciabattoni G, Patrignani P, et al. Oxidant stres and aspirin-insensitive thromboxane biosynthesis in severe unstable angina. Circulation 2000; 102: 1007–13PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Blanche D. Involvement of hydrogen and lipid peroxides in acute tobacco smoking-induced platelet hyperactivity. Am J Physiol 1995; 268: H679–85Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Ichiki K, Ikeda H, Haramaki N, et al. Long-term smoking impairs platelet-derived nitric oxide release. Circulation 1996; 94: 3109–14PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Furman MI, Benoit SE, Barnard MR, et al. Increased platelet reactivity and circulating monocyte-platelet aggregates in patients with stable coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 1998; 31: 352–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Weber AA, Zimmermann KC, Kirchrath JM, et al. Cyclooxygenase-2 in human platelets as a possible factor in aspirin resistance [letter]. Lancet 1999; 353: 900PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Maree AO, Curtin RJ, Chubb A, et al. Cyclooxygenase-1 haplotype modulates platelet response to aspirin. J Thromb Haemost 2005; 10: 2340–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Michelson AD, Furman MI, Goldschmidt-Clermont P, et al. Platelet GP IIIa Pl(A) polymorphisms display different sensitivities to agonists. Circulation 2000; 101: 1013–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Patrono C, FitzGerald GA. Isoprostanes: potential markers of oxidant stress in atherothrombotic disease. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 1997; 17: 2309–15PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Fontana P, Dupont A, Gandrille S, et al. Adenosine diphosphate-induced latelet aggregation is associated with P2Y12 gene sequence variations in healthy subjects. Circulation 2003; 108: 989–95PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Taubert D, Kastrati A, Harlfinger S, et al. Pharmacokinetics of clopidogrel after administration of a high loading dose. Thromb Haemost 2004; 92: 311–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Angiolillo DJ, Fernandez-Ortiz A, Bernardo E, et al. Contribution of gene sequence variations of the hepatic cytochrome P450 3A4 enzyme to variability in individual responsiveness to clopidogrel. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 2006; 26: 1895–900PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Beitelshees AL, McLeod ML. Clopidogrel pharmacogenetics: promising steps towards patient care? Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 2006; 26: 1681–3PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Angiolillo DJ, Fernández-Ortiz A, Bernardo E, et al. 807 C/T polymorphism of the glycoprotein la gene and pharmacogenetic modulation of platelet response to dual antiplatelet treatment. Blood Coagul Fibrinolysis 2004; 15: 427–33PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Angiolillo DJ, Fernandez-Ortiz A, Bernardo E, et al. Variability in individual responsiveness to clopidogrel: clinical implications, management, and future perspectives. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007; 49: 1505–16PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Renda G, Rocca B, Crocchiolo R, et al. Effect of fibrinogen concentration and platelet count on the inhibitory effect of abciximab and tirofiban. Thromb Haemost 2003; 89: 348–54PubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Mahmud E, Cavendish JJ, Tsimikas S, et al. Elevated plasma fibrinogen level predicts suboptimal response to therapy with both single- and double-bolus eptifibatide during percutaneous coronary intervention. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007; 49: 2163–71PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Feit F, Voeltz MD, Attubato MJ, et al. Predictors and impact of major hemorrhage on mortality following percutaneous coronary intervention from the REPLACE-2 Trial. Am J Cardiol 2007; 100: 1364–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Steinhubl SR, Kastrati A, Berger PB. Variation in the definitions of bleeding in clinical trials of patients with acute coronary syndromes and undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions and its impact on the apparent safety of antithrombotic drugs. Am Heart J 2007 Jul; 154(1): 3–11PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Rao SV, Eikelboom JA, Granger CB, et al. Bleeding and blood transfusion issues in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes. Eur Heart J 2007 May; 28(10): 1193–204PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Sadeghi HM, Stone GW, Grines CL, et al. Impact of renal insufficiency in patients undergoing primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction. Circulation 2003; 108: 2769–75PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Weitz JI. Biological rationale for the therapeutic role of specific antithrombins. Coron Artery Dis 1996; 7: 409–19PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Weitz JI, Hudoba M, Massel D, et al. Clot-bound thrombin is protected from inhibition by heparin-antithrombin III but is susceptible to inactivation by antithrombin III-independent inhibitors. J Clin Invest 1990; 86: 385–91PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Maraganore JM, Bourdon P, Jablonski J, et al. Design and characterization of hirulogs: a novel class of bivalent peptide inhibitors of thrombin. J Clin Invest 1990; 29: 7095–101Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Fareed J, Hoppensteadt D, Walenga J, et al. Pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties of enoxaparin: implications for clinical practice. Clin Pharmacokinet 2003; 42: 1043–57PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Yusuf S, Mehta SR, Chrolavicius S, et al. Effects of fondaparinux on mortality and reinfarction in patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: the OASIS-6 randomized trial. JAMA 2006; 295: 1519–30PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Antman EM, Morrow DA, McCabe CH, et al. Enoxaparin versus unfractionated heparin with fibrinolysis for ST-elevation myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 2006; 354: 1477–88PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Antman EM, Hand M, Armstrong PW, et al. 2007 focused update of the ACC/AHA 2004 guidelines for the management of patients with st-elevation myocardial infarction: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on practice guidelines. Developed in collaboration with the Canadian Cardiovascular Society endorsed by the American Academy of Family Physicians: 2007 Writing Group to Review New Evidence and Update the ACC/AHA 2004 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction, Writing on Behalf of the 2004 Writing Committee. Circulation 2008; 117: 296–329PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Lincoff AM, Bittl JA, Harrington RA, et al. Bivalirudin and provisional glycoprotein IIb/IIIa blockade compared with heparin and planned glycoprotein IIb/IIIa blockade during percutaneous coronary intervention: REPLACE-2 randomized trial [published erratum appears in JAMA 2003; 289(13): 1638]. JAMA 2003; 289: 853–63PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    White HD. Thrombin-specific anticoagulation with bivalirudin versus heparin in patients receiving fibrinolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction: the HERO-2 randomised trial. Hirulog and Early Reperfusion or Occlusion (HERO) Study Group. Lancet 2001; 358: 1855–63PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Stone GW, Witzenbichler B, Guagliumi G, et al. Bivalirudin during primary PCI in acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 2008; 358: 2218–30PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Guagliumi G, Witzenbichler B, Peruga JZ, et al. Safety and effectiveness of bivalirudin compared to either abciximab or eptifibatide in patients with acute myocardial infarction undergoing primary angioplasty: the HORIZONS AMI trial [online]. Available from URL: http://clintrialresults.org/Slides/HORIZONS_ACC%202008_Abciximab.ppt [Accessed 2008 Jul 14]
  82. 82.
    De Luca G, Marino P. Adjunctive benefits from low-molecular-weight heparins as compared to unfractionated heparin among patients with STsegment elevation myocardial infarction treated with thrombolysis: a meta-analysis of the randomized trials. Am Heart J 2007; 154: 1085el–6Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Montalescot G, White HD, Gallo R, et al. Enoxaparin versus unfractionated heparin in elective percutaneous coronary intervention. N Engl J Med 2006; 355: 1006–17PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Petitou M, Duchaussoy P, Herbert JM, et al. The synthetic pentasaccharide fondaparinux: first in the class of antithrombotic agents that selectively inhibit coagulation factor Xa. Semin Thromb Hemost 2002; 28: 393–402PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Olson ST, Swanson R, Raub-Segall E, et al. Accelerating ability of synthetic oligosaccharides on antithrombin inhibition of proteinases of the clotting and fibrinolytic systems: comparison ith heparin and low-molecular-weight heparin. Thromb Haemost 2004; 92: 929–39PubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Ashida SI, Abiko Y. Inhibition of platelet aggregation by a new agent, ticlopidine. Thromb Haemost 1979; 40: 542–50PubMedGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Bernat A, Mares AM, Defreyn G, et al. Effect of various antiplatelet agents on acute arterial thrombosis in the rat. Thromb Haemost 1993; 70: 812–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Gachet C. ADP receptors of platelets and their inhibition. Thromb Haemost 2001 Jul; 86(1): 222–32PubMedGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    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: 1179–89PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Chen ZM, Jiang LX, Chen YP, et al. Addition of clopidogrel to aspirin in 45,852 patients with acute myocardial infarction: randomised placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 2005; 366: 1607–21PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    De Luca G, Suryapranata H, van’t Hof AW, et al. Comparison between ticlopidine and clopidogrel in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction treated with coronary stenting. Thromb Haemost 2004; 91: 1084–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Parodi G, Sciagra R, Migliorini A, et al. A randomized trial comparing clopidogrel versus ticlopidine therapy in patients undergoing infarct artery stenting for acute myocardial infarction with abciximab as adjunctive therapy. Am Heart J 2005; 150: 220PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    von Beckerath N, Kastrati A, Wieczorek A, et al. A double-blind, randomized study on platelet aggregation in patients treated with a daily dose of 150 or 75mg of clopidogrel for 30 days. Eur Heart J 2007; 28: 1814–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Campo G, Valgimigli M, Gemmati D, et al. Poor responsiveness to clopidogrel: drug-specific or class-effect mechanism? Evidence from a clopidogrel-to-ticlopidine crossover study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007 Sep 18; 50(12): 1132–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Mehta S. CURRENT/OASIS 7: Clopidogrel Optimal Loading Dose Usage to Reduce Recurrent EveNTs/Optimal Antiplatelet Strategy for Interventions [ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00335452]. US National Institutes of Health. Clinical-Trials.gov [online]. Available from URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00335452 [Accessed 2008 Jul 14]
  96. 96.
    Dangas G, Guagliumi G, Witzenbichler B, et al. Impact of clopidogrel loading dose on the safety and effectiveness of bivalirudin in patients undergoing primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction: the HORIZONS AMI trial [online]. Available from URL: http://clintrialresults.org [Accessed 2008 Apr 17]
  97. 97.
    Niitsu Y, Jakubowski JA, Sugidachi A, et al. Pharmacology of CS-747 (prasugrel, LY640315), a novel, potent antiplatelet agent with in vivo P2Y12 receptor antagonist activity. Semin Thromb Hemost 2005; 31: 184–94PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    van Giezen JJ, Humphries RG. Preclinical and clinical studies with selective reversible direct P2Y12 antagonists. Semin Thromb Hemost 2005; 31: 195–204PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Gretler DD, Conley PB, Andre P, et al. “First in human” experience with PRT060128, a new direct-acting, reversible, P2Y12 inhibitor for IV and oral use [abstract]. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007; 49 (9 Suppl. 2): 326AGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Asai F, Jakubowski JA, Naganuma H, et al. Platelet inhibitory activity and pharmacokinetics of prasugrel (CS-747) a novel thienopyridine P2Y12 inhibitor: a single ascending dose study in healthy humans. Platelets 2006; 17: 209–17PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Sugidachi A, Ogawa T, Kurihara A, et al. The greater in vivo antiplatelet effects of prasugrel as compared to clopidogrel reflect more efficient generation of its active metabolite with similar antiplatelet activity to that of clopidogrel’s active metabolite. J Thromb Haemost 2007; 5: 1545–51PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Brandt JT, Payne CD, Wiviott SD, et al. A comparison of prasugrel and clopidogrel loading doses on platelet function: magnitude of platelet inhibition is related to active metabolite formation. Am Heart J 2007; 153: 66PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Jernberg T, Payne CD, Winters KJ, et al. Prasugrel achieves greater inhibition of platelet aggregation and a lower rate of non-responders compared with clopidogrel in aspirin-treated patients with stable coronary artery disease. Eur Heart J 2006; 27: 1166–73PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Payne CD, Li YG, Small DS, et al. Increased active metabolite formation explains the greater platelet inhibition with prasugrel compared to high-dose clopidogrel. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 2007; 50: 555–62PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Wiviott SD, Antman EM, Winters KJ, et al. Randomized comparison of prasugrel (CS-747, LY640315), a novel thie-nopyridine P2Y12 antagonist, with clopidogrel in percutaneous coronary intervention: results of the Joint Utilization of Medications to Block Platelets Optimally (JUMBO)-TIMI 26 trial. Circulation 2005; 111: 3366–73PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Wiviott SD, Braunwald E, McCabe CH, et al. Prasugrel versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med 2007; 357: 2001–15PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Storey RF, Husted S, Harrington RA, et al. Inhibition of platelet aggregation by AZD6140, a reversible oral P2Y12 receptor antagonist, compared with clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007 Nov 6; 50(19): 1852–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Cannon CP, Husted S, Harrington RA, et al. Safety, tolerability, and initial efficacy of AZD6140, the first reversible oral adenosine diphosphate receptor antagonist, compared with clopidogrel, in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome: primary results of the DISPERSE-2 trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007 Nov 6; 50(19): 1844–51PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    AstraZeneca. A comparison of AZD6140 and clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndrome (PLATO) [ClinicalTrials.gov: identifier NCT00391872]. US National Institutes of Health, ClinicalTrials.gov [online]. Available from URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00391872 [Accessed 2008 Jul 14]
  110. 110.
    Greenbaum AB, Grines CL, Bittl JA, et al. Initial experience with an intravenous P2Y12 platelet receptor antagonist in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: results from a 2-part, phase II, multicenter, randomized, placeboand active-controlled trial. Am Heart J 2006; 151: 689PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. 111.
    Storey RF, Oldroyd KG, Wilcox RG. Open multicentre study of the P2T receptor antagonist AR-C69931MX assessing safety, tolerability and activity in patients with acute coronary syndromes. Thromb Haemost 2001; 85: 401–7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  112. 112.
    Greenbaum AB, Ohman EM, Gibson CM, et al. Preliminary experience with intravenous P2Y12 platelet receptor inhibition as an adjunct to reduced-dose alteplase during acute myocardial infarction: results of the Safety, Tolerability and Effect on Patency in Acute Myocardial Infarction (STEP-AMI) angiographic trial. Am Heart J 2007; 154: 702–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. 113.
    The Medicines Company. A clinical trial to demonstrate the efficacy of cangrelor (PCI) [ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00305162]. US National Institutes of Health, ClinicalTrials.gov [online]. Available from URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00305162 [Accessed 2008 Sep 17]
  114. 114.
    The Medicines Company. Cangrelor versus standard therapy to achieve optimal management of platelet inhibition (Platform) [ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00385138]. US National Institutes of Health, ClinicalTrials.gov [online]. Available from URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00385138 [Accessed 2008 Sep 17]
  115. 115.
    Faulds D, Sorkin EM. Abciximab (c7E3 Fab): a review of its pharmacology and therapeutic potential in ischaemic heart disease. Drugs 1994; 48: 583–98PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. 116.
    Phillips DR, Scarborough RM. Clinical pharmacology of eptifibatide. Am J Cardiol 1997; 80: 11–20BCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. 117.
    Barrett JS, Murphy G, Peerlinck K, et al. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of MK-383, a selective non-peptide platelet glycoprotein-IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist, in healthy men. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1994; 56: 377–88PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. 118.
    Brener SJ, Ban LA, Burchenal JEB, et al., on behalf of the RAPPORT investigators. Randomized, placebo-controlled trial of platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa blockade with primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction. Circulation 1998; 98: 734–41PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. 119.
    Stone G, Grines CL, Cox AD, et al., for the Controlled Abciximab and Device Investigation to Lower Late Angioplasty Complications (CADILLAC) Investigators. Comparison of angioplasty with stenting with or without abciximab, in acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 2002; 346: 957–66PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. 120.
    Montalescot G, Barragan P, Wittemberg O, et al. Platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibition with coronary stenting for acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 2001; 344: 1895–903PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. 121.
    Neumann FJ, Kastrati A, Schmitt C, et al. Effect of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor blockade with abciximab on clinical and angiographic restenosis rate after the placement of coronary stents following acute myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol 2000; 35: 915–21PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. 122.
    Petronio AS, Musumeci G, Limbruno U, et al. Abciximab improves 6-month clinical outcome after rescue coronary angioplasty. Am Heart J 2002; 143: 334–41PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. 123.
    Petronio AS, Rovai D, Musumeci G, et al. Effects of abciximab on microvascular integrity and left ventricular functional recovery in patients with acute infarction treated by primary coronary angioplasty. Eur Heart J 2003; 24: 67–76PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. 124.
    Zorman S, Zorman D, Noc M. Effects of abciximab pretreatment in patients with acute myocardial infarction undergoing primary angioplasty. Am J Cardiol 2002; 90: 533–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. 125.
    Petronio AS, De Carlo M, Ciabatti N, et al. Left ventricular remodeling after primary coronary angioplasty in patients treated with abciximab or intracoronary adenosine. Am Heart J 2005; 150:1015PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. 126.
    Lee CW, Moon DH, Hong MK, et al. Effect of abciximab on myocardial salvage in patients with acute myocardial infarction undergoing primary angioplasty. Am J Cardiol 2002; 90: 1243–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. 127.
    Zeymer U, Zahn R, Schiele R, et al. Early eptifibatide improves TIMI 3 patency before primary percutaneous coronary intervention for acute ST elevation myocardial infarction: results of the randomized integrilin in acute myocardial infarction (IN-TAMI) pilot trial. Eur Heart J 2005; 26: 1971–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. 128.
    Gibson CM, Kirtane AJ, Murphy SA, et al. Early initiation of eptifibatide in the emergency department before primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: results of the Time to Integrilin Therapy in Acute Myocardial Infarction (TITAN)-TIMI 34 trial. Am Heart J 2006; 152: 668–75PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. 129.
    Valgimigli M, Percoco G, Malagutti P, et al. Tirofiban and sirolimus-eluting stent vs abciximab and bare-metal stent for acute myocardial infarction: a randomized trial. JAMA 2005; 293: 2109–17PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. 130.
    van’t Hof AW, Ten Berg J, Heestermans T, et al. Prehospital initiation of tirofiban in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary angioplasty (On-TIME 2): a multicentre, double-blind, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2008 Aug 16; 372(9638): 537–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  131. 131.
    Valgimigli M, Campo G, Percoco G, et al. Multicentre Evaluation of Single High-Dose Bolus Tirofiban vs Abciximab With Sirolimus-Eluting Stent or Bare Metal Stent in Acute Myocardial Infarction Study (MULTISTRATEGY) Investigators. Comparison of angioplasty with infusion of tirofiban or abciximab and with implantation of sirolimus-eluting or uncoated stents for acute myocardial infarction: the MULTISTRATEGY randomized trial. JAMA 2008; 299: 1788–99PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. 132.
    Neumann FJ, Blasini R, Schmitt C, et al. Effect of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor blockade on recovery of coronary flow and left ventricular function after the placement of coronary-artery stents in acute myocardial infarction. Circulation 1998; 98: 2695–701PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. 133.
    Costantini CO, Stone GW, Mehran R, et al. Frequency, correlates, and clinical implications of myocardial perfusion after primary angioplasty and stenting, with and without glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibition, in acute myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004; 44: 305–12PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. 134.
    Steen H, Lehrke S, Wiegand UK, et al. Very early cardiac magnetic resonance imaging for quantification of myocardial tissue perfusion in patients receiving tirofiban before percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Am Heart J 2005 Mar; 149(3): 564PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. 135.
    Abciximab in patients with AMI undergoing primary PCI after clopidogrel pretreatment. Bavarian Reperfusion Alternatives Evaluation (BRAVE)-3 Trial [online]. Available from URL: http://clintrialresults.org [Accessed 2008 Mar 30]
  136. 136.
    Ernst NM, Suryapranata H, Miedema K, et al. Achieved platelet aggregation inhibition after different antiplatelet regimens during percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004; 44: 1187–93PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. 137.
    Danzi GB, Sesana M, Capuano C, et al. Comparison in patients having primary coronary angioplasty of abciximab versus tirofiban on recovery of left ventricular function. Am J Cardiol 2004; 94: 35–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. 138.
    Marzocchi A. Randomized Study on Facilitated Angioplasty with Tirofiban or Abciximab (FATA) [ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00383136]. US National Institutes of Health, ClinicalTrials.gov [online]. Available from URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct/show/NCT00383136 [Accessed 2008 Jul 14]
  139. 139.
    Zeymer U. Abciximab vs Eptifibatide in primary PCI for acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. EVA-AMI trial [online]. Available from URL: http://scientificsessions.ameri-canheart.org/includes/pdfs/03EVA_AMIshort.pdf [Accessed 2008 Jul 14]
  140. 140.
    Bellandi F, Maioli M, Gallopin M, et al. Increase of myocardial salvage and left ventricular function recovery with intracoronary abciximab downstream of the coronary occlusion in patients with acute myocardial infarction treated with primary coronary intervention. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2004; 62: 186–92PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  141. 141.
    Thiele H, Schindler K, Friedenberger J, et al. Intracoronary compared with intravenous bolus abciximab application in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary coronary intervention: the randomized Leipzig Immadiate percutaneous Coronary Intervention Abciximab i.v. versus i.c. in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Trial (LIP-SIAAbciximab-STEMI) [abstract]. Circulation 2008; 118(1): 49–57PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  142. 142.
    Bolognese L, Cerisanol L, Santoro CM. Effects of pre-treatment with abciximab on coronary artery patency and microcirculation in high risk patients with acute myocardial infarction elegible for primary angioplasty: results of the abciximab patients evaluation (APE) randomized pilot study [abstract]. Circulation 2000; (10 Suppl. A): 150Google Scholar
  143. 143.
    van’t Hof AW, Ernst N, de Boer MJ, et al. Facilitation of primary coronary angioplasty by early start of a glycoprotein 2b/3a inhibitor: results of the ongoing tirofiban in myocardial infarction evaluation (On-TIME) trial. Eur Heart J 2004; 25: 837–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  144. 144.
    Cutlip DE, Ricciardi MJ, Ling FS, et al. Effect of tirofiban before primary angioplasty on initial coronary flow and early ST-segment resolution in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol 2003; 92: 977–80PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  145. 145.
    Lee DP, Herity NA, Hiatt BL, et al. Adjunctive platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor inhibition with tirofiban before primary angioplasty improves angiographie outcomes: results of the Tirofiban Given in the Emergency Room before Primary Angioplasty (TIGER-PA) pilot trial. Circulation 2003 Mar 25; 107(11): 1497–501PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  146. 146.
    Maioli M, Bellandi F, Leoncini M, et al. Randomized early versus late abciximab in acute myocardial infarction treated with primary coronary intervention (RELAx-AMI Trial). J Am Coll Cardiol 2007; 49: 1517–24PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  147. 147.
    Arntz HR, Schroder J, Pels K, et al. Prehospital versus periprocedural administration of abciximab in STEMI: early and late results from the randomized REOMOBILE Pilot study. Eur Heart J 2003; 24: S268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  148. 148.
    Gabriel HM, Oliveira JA, da Silva PC, et al. Early administration of abciximab bolus in the emergency department improves angiographic outcome after primary PCI as assessed by TIMI frame count: results of the early ReoPro administration in myocardial infarction (ERAMI) trial. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2006; 68: 218–24PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  149. 149.
    Gyongyosi M, Domanovits H, Benzer W, et al. Use of abciximab prior to primary angioplasty in STEMI results in early recanalization of the infarct-related artery and improved myocardial tissue reperfusion: results of the Austrian multi-centre randomized ReoPro-BRIDGING Study. Eur Heart J 2004; 25: 2125–33PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  150. 150.
    Rakowski T, Zalewski J, Legutko J, et al. Early abciximab administration before primary percutaneous coronary intervention improves infarct-related artery patency and left ventricular function in high-risk patients with anterior wall myocardial infarction: a randomized study. Am Heart J 2007; 153: 360–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  151. 151.
    Emre A, Ucer E, Yesilcimen K, et al. Impact of early tirofiban on myocardial salvage in patients with acute myocardial infarction undergoing infarct-related artery stenting. Cardiology 2006; 106: 264–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  152. 152.
    Ellis SG, Tendera M, de Beider MA, et al. Facilitated PCI in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 2008; 358: 2205–17PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  153. 153.
    Dudek D, Siudak Z, Janzon M, et al. Patients transferred for primary PCI display reduced mortality when treatment with abciximab was started early compared with abciximab given in the cathlab: results from the EUROTRANSFER Registry [abstract]. Eur Heart J 2007; 28 Suppl. A: 384Google Scholar
  154. 154.
    Huber K, Aylward PE, van’t Hof AWJ, et al. Glycoprotein IIb-IIIa inhibitors before primary percutaneous coronary intervention of ST-Elevation myocardial infarction improve perfusion and outcomes: insights from APEX-AMI [abstract]. Circulation 2007; 116: 11–673Google Scholar
  155. 155.
    De Luca G, Gibson CM, Bellandi F, et al. Early Glycoprotein IIb-IIIa inhibitors in Primary angioplasty (EGYPT) cooperation: an individual patients’ data meta-analysis. Heart. Epub 2008 Jun 5Google Scholar
  156. 156.
    Eisenberg PR, Sobel BE, Jaffe AS. Activation of prothrombin accompanying thrombolysis with recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator. J Am Coll Cardiol 1992; 19: 1065–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  157. 157.
    O’Neill WW, Weintraub R, Grines CL, et al. A prospective, placebo-controlled, randomized trial of intravenous streptokinase and angioplasty versus lone angioplasty therapy of acute myocardial infarction. Circulation 1992; 86: 1710–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  158. 158.
    Widimsky P, Groch L, Zelizko M, et al. Multicentre randomized trial comparing transport to primary angioplasty vs immediate thrombolysis vs combined strategy for patients with acute myocardial infarction presenting to a community hospital without a catheterization laboratory. The PRAGUE study. Eur Heart J 2000; 21:823–31PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  159. 159.
    Vermeer F, Oude Ophuis AJ, vd Berg EJ, et al. Prospective randomised comparison between thrombolysis, rescue PTCA, and primary PTCA in patients with extensive myocardial infarction admitted to a hospital without PTCA facilities: a safety and feasibility study. Heart 1999; 82: 426–31PubMedGoogle Scholar
  160. 160.
    Ross AM, Coyne KS, Reiner JS, et al. A randomized trial comparing primary angioplasty with a strategy of short-acting thrombolysis and immediate planned rescue angioplasty in acute myocardial infarction: the PACT trial. PACT investigators. Plasminogen-activator Angioplasty Compatibility Trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 1999; 34: 1954–62PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  161. 161.
    Fernandez-Aviles F, Alonso JJ, Castro-Beiras A, et al. Primary versus facilitated percutaneous coronary intervention (tenecteplase plus stenting) in patients with ST-elevated myocardial infarction: the final results of the GRACIA-2 randomized trial [abstract]. Eur Heart J 2007; 25 Suppl.: 33Google Scholar
  162. 162.
    ASSENT-4 PCI Investigators. Primary versus tenecteplase-facilitated percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction (ASSENT-4 PCI): randomised trial. Lancet 2006; 367: 569–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  163. 163.
    Dudek D, Zmudka K, Kaluza GL, et al. Facilitated percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute myocardial infarction transferred from remote hospitals. Am J Cardiol 2003; 91: 227–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  164. 164.
    Kastrati A, Mehilli J, Schlotterbeck K, et al. Early administration of reteplase plus abciximab vs abciximab alone in patients with acute myocardial infarction referred for percutaneous coronary intervention: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2004; 291: 947–54PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  165. 165.
    Wong A, Mak KH, Chan C, et al. Combined fibrinolysis using reduced-dose alteplase plus abciximab with immediate rescue angioplasty versus primary angioplasty with adjunct use of abciximab for the treatment of acute myocardial infarction: Asia-Pacific Acute Myocardial Infarction Trial (APAMIT) pilot study. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2004; 62: 445–52PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  166. 166.
    ADVANCE MI Investigators. Facilitated percutaneous coronary intervention for acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: results from the prematurely terminated ADdressing the Value of facilitated ANgioplasty after Combination therapy or Eptifibatide monotherapy in acute Myocardial Infarction (ADVANCE MI) trial. Am Heart J 2005; 150: 116–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  167. 167.
    Peters S, Truemmel M, Koehler B. Facilitated PCI by combination fibrinolysis or upstream tirofiban in acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: results of the Alteplase and Tirofiban in Acute Myocardial Infarction (ATAMI) trial. Int J Cardiol. Epub 2007 Dec 3Google Scholar
  168. 168.
    Di Mario C, Dudek D, Piscione F, et al. CARESS-in-AMI (Combined Abciximab RE-teplase Stent Study in Acute Myocardial Infarction) Investigators. 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: 559–68PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  169. 169.
    Cantor WJ. Trial of Routine ANgioplasty and Stenting after Fibrinolysis to Enhance Reperfusion in Acute Myocardial Infarction (TRANSFER-AMI) [online]. Available from URL: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/572262 [Accessed 2008 Apr 1]
  170. 170.
    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: 38–43PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis Data Information BV 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Cardiology, “Maggiore della Carità” HospitalEastern Piedmont University “A. Avogadro”NovaraItaly

Personalised recommendations