Does time matter? A pooled analysis of randomized clinical trials comparing primary percutaneous coronary intervention and in-hospital fibrinolysis in acute myocardial infarction patients
Why the study?
Does primary percutaneous coronary intervention reduce 30-day mortality compared to in-hospital fibrinolysis in patients with acute myocardial infarction?
Population
6,763 patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) from 22 pooled randomized trials
Comparison
Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) vs In-hospital fibrinolysis (FL)
Design
Meta-analysis
Follow-up
30 days
Authors
Discussion
Loading...
Member takes
Implication
Prioritize timely PPCI over fibrinolysis in AMI; reinforces guideline-directed superiority with Level 1 evidence.
Structured PICO
Does primary percutaneous coronary intervention reduce 30-day mortality compared to in-hospital fibrinolysis in patients with acute myocardial infarction?
P
Population
6,763 patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) from 22 pooled randomized trials
I
Intervention
Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI)
C
Comparator
In-hospital fibrinolysis (FL)
O
Outcome
30-day mortalityhard clinical
Primary PCI significantly reduces 30-day mortality compared to in-hospital fibrinolysis in AMI patients, with the relative benefit being greatest when PCI-related delay is under 35 minutes.
Cite This Study
Eric Boersma (2006) studied this question.