PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
January 1, 1988Japanese Circulation Journal2 citationsOpen Access

Efficacy of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Comparison with intracoronary thrombolysis.

ATAkinori TakizawaMNMasao NagaoKYKazuhiro Yamamoto

Structured PICO

Does percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty improve reperfusion rates and clinical outcomes compared to intracoronary thrombolysis in patients with acute myocardial infarction?

P
Population
154 patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI)
I
Intervention
Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA)
C
Comparator
Intracoronary thrombolysis (ICT)
O
Outcome
Reperfusion ratesurrogate

PTCA achieved higher reperfusion rates and lower incidences of reinfarction and post-infarction angina compared to intracoronary thrombolysis in patients with acute myocardial infarction.

Abstract

We retrospectively compared the efficacy of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) and intracoronary thrombolysis (ICT) in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). The ICT group consisted of 62 consecutive patients who underwent ICT before the introduction of PTCA for AMI and who were considered to be candidates for PTCA based on review of their cine-films. The PTCA group consisted of 92 consecutive patients who underwent PTCA thereafter. The reperfusion rate was significantly higher in the PTCA group than in the ICT group (92.4% vs 71.4%, p less than 0.01) and the residual stenosis was significantly lower in the former. Furthermore, the incidences of reinfarction and post-infarction angina were significantly lower in the former than in the latter (3.3% vs 12.9%, p less than 0.05 and 6.5% vs 29.0%, p less than 0.001 respectively). Although the degree of improvement in left ventricular function was influenced by the result of reperfusion, it was not affected by the reperfusion method. Therefore, PTCA did not improve left ventricular function more than ICT unless ICT alone failed to achieve reperfusion.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Takizawa et al. (1988) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a110ba06da82ae745f33edahttps://doi.org/10.1253/jcj.52.211
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Effects of Intracoronary Streptokinase and Intracoronary Nitroglycerin Infusion on Coronary Angiographic Patterns and Mortality in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction1984 · 287 citations
  2. 2Western Washington Randomized Trial of Intracoronary Streptokinase in Acute Myocardial Infarction1983 · 793 citations
  3. 3Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty immediately after intracoronary streptolysis of transmural myocardial infarction.1982 · 309 citations
  4. 4A Randomized Trial of Intracoronary Streptokinase in the Treatment of Acute Myocardial Infarction1983 · 535 citations
  5. 5Return of left ventricular function after reperfusion in patients with myocardial infarction: importance of subtotal stenoses or intact collaterals.1984 · 185 citations