Key result
The severity of residual coronary stenosis immediately after urokinase therapy did not significantly influence later left ventricular asynergic area at 1 month in the 31 patients evaluated.
Why the study?
Does the severity of residual coronary stenosis immediately after intracoronary urokinase therapy influence the size of later left ventricular asynergic area in patients with anterior AMI?
Cohort (n=31)
Does the severity of residual coronary stenosis immediately after intracoronary urokinase therapy influence the size of later left ventricular asynergic area in patients with anterior AMI?
The severity of residual coronary stenosis immediately after intracoronary thrombolysis for anterior AMI does not appear to impact the subsequent size of the left ventricular asynergic area or global ejection fraction at 1 month.
Residual stenosis after urokinase should not yet guide LV recovery expectations in anterior AMI; leaves open other determinants of asynergy.
To determine whether the severity of residual coronary artery stenosis immediately after thrombolytic therapy influences the size of later left ventricular (LV) asynergic area, we reviewed coronary angiograms (CAGs) and left ventriculograms (LVGs) of 31 patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). All patients received intracoronary urokinase therapy within 6 h after onset of AMI due to total occlusion of the proximal left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD). A dose of 960,000 IU urokinase was infused into the ostium of the left coronary artery over 40 min. Patients in whom antegrade blood flow without delayed distal filling was restored received rigorous anticoagulation. The patients were divided into three groups according to the severity of the coronary lesion immediately after urokinase therapy: 9 patients with complete occlusion in Group 1, 15 with > 90% stenosis in Group 2, and 7 with < 90% stenosis in Group 3. There were no significant differences in the baseline clinical characteristics among the patients in the three groups. The LADs in Group 1 were also totally occluded 1 month after urokinase therapy, the treated vessels in both Groups 2 and 3 were still patent, and patients in Group 2 showed a further reduction in residual stenosis. When LV asynergic area, regional wall motion, and global ejection fraction (EF) were compared among the three groups, no significant differences were demonstrated. In comparison with the data immediately after urokinase therapy, all parameters 1 month after therapy were significantly improved in both Groups 2 and 3.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fukunaga et al. (1994) conducted a cohort in Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) (n=31). Intracoronary urokinase therapy vs. Comparison among complete occlusion, >90% stenosis, and <90% stenosis groups was evaluated on Left ventricular asynergic area, regional wall motion, and global ejection fraction. The severity of residual coronary stenosis immediately after urokinase therapy did not significantly influence later left ventricular asynergic area at 1 month in the 31 patients evaluated.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: