Why the study?
Do various thrombolytic and revascularization strategies improve clinical and angiographic outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndromes?
Do various thrombolytic and revascularization strategies improve clinical and angiographic outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndromes?
This review provides a summary of the early TIMI trials evaluating thrombolysis and revascularization in acute coronary syndromes.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Historical TIMI summaries inform ACS context; leaves open relevance of early thrombolysis findings to modern reperfusion strategies.
Myocardial Infarction: Summary of the TIMI Trials Remembering which "TIMI" trial is which has always been a problem for me, and I suspect it has been for others as well. Even the acronym 'TIMI" has multiple meanings, namely, Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction, Thrombolysis in Myocardial Ischemia, and Thrombin Inhibition in Myocardial Ischemia. I thought a review of these trials might be of interest to readers of Clinical Cardiology. What follows will summarize these trials in a repetitive format-that is, TIMI Trial Number, DrugProcedure, Major Endpoint(s), and Results. I have also included the references for those trials that have been published or presented for those who wish to know study details. Major Endpoints: Ventricular function, mortality. Results: No difference in clinical outcome at 6 weeks or one year. Global left ventricular ejection fraction averaged 50.5%. TIMI 3A4 Drug/Procedure: Heparin vs. heparin plus accelerated IV Major Endpoints: Coronary angiographic stenoses at 48 h Results: IV rtPA augmented lysis of thrombi and relief of rtPA for unstable angina and non-Q-wave MI. and TIMI grade flow. coronary narrowings better than heparin alone. TIMl 3B5> Drugs/Prncedure: rtPA vs. placebo as initial therapy in unstable anginahon-Q-wave MI and early revascularization vs. early conservative therapy (1,473 patients). Major Endpoints: Death, MI, failure of initial therapy. Results: No difference (54.2 vs. 55.5%) at 6 weeks. No difference at 1 year. TIMI 1' Drug/Procedure: Intravenous (IV) streptokinase vs. IV recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (@A) in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
C Conti (1998) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: