Why the study?
Do newer fibrinolytic agents improve clinical efficacy without increasing hemorrhagic complications compared to first-generation agents in patients with acute pulmonary embolism?
Do newer fibrinolytic agents improve clinical efficacy without increasing hemorrhagic complications compared to first-generation agents in patients with acute pulmonary embolism?
Newer fibrinolytic agents for acute pulmonary embolism cause hemorrhagic complications at rates similar to older agents, requiring clear proof of superior efficacy before replacing less expensive drugs like streptokinase.
Requires proof of superior efficacy before replacing streptokinase in pulmonary embolism; leaves open net clinical benefit of newer agents.
Pulmonary embolism can produce severe cardiopulmonary dysfunction characterized by pulmonary artery hypertension, right ventricular failure, and hypoxemia. The search for the source of a pulmonary embolus, by exploration of the veins of the lower limbs and the inferior vena cava should be systematically carried out in all cases of pulmonary embolus which are not immediately life-threatening to the patient. The treatment of deep vein thrombosis associated with pulmonary embolism with thrombolytic agents has been proposed and utilized for approximately 20 years. Although superior results have been claimed with thrombolytic agents, the use of this type of treatment remains limited to massive or sub-massive pulmonary embolism. Fibrinolytic agents with high specificity for fibrin in the thrombi and little systemic activation of the fibrinolytic system have been developed and tested in preliminary clinical trials of patients with acute pulmonary embolism. The largest published experience available has been with recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (rtPA). The acylated streptokinase-plasminogen complex (APSAC) and pro-urokinase also gave promising results. All these agents were accompanied by unexpectedly high incidence of systemic activation of the fibrinolytic system and by hemorrhagic complications with frequencies similar to those that follows the use of first generation products (urokinase and streptokinase). Hence, their superior clinical efficacy must be clearly proven before they are substituted for a more widely available and less expensive drug, such as streptokinase.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
D’Orio et al. (1989) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: