Why the study?
Does coronary stenting improve angiographic and clinical outcomes compared to balloon angioplasty alone in patients with failed thrombolysis?
Does coronary stenting improve angiographic and clinical outcomes compared to balloon angioplasty alone in patients with failed thrombolysis?
Rescue coronary stenting after failed thrombolysis is safe and improves both acute angiographic results and target vessel revascularization rates compared to balloon angioplasty alone.
May support stenting over PTCA after failed thrombolysis; leaves open confirmation in randomized trials.
The role of coronary stenting in improving outcomes after failed thrombolysis has not been well described. This study represents a registry of rescue coronary interventions performed during a 3 year period in which interventional treatment was changing for this high risk population. We analyzed acute angiographic results and clinical outcomes in 108 consecutive patients treated for thrombolytic failure with either balloon angioplasty (n = 63) or coronary stenting (n = 45). The overall in-hospital mortality rate was 5.5%, and there was no increase in complications in the stent group. Coronary stenting was associated with improved angiographic results including lower residual stenosis in the culprit artery (15 +/- 10% vs. 31 +/- 22%, P < 0.001) without increasing bleeding complications. The rate of in-hospital and long term target vessel revascularization in the stent group was significantly lower than in the unmatched PTCA group. Rescue coronary stenting is safe, improves acute angiographic results compared to PTCA alone and leads to excellent in-hospital and long term outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dauerman et al. (2000) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: