Key result
This editorial discusses the premise and logistical challenges of facilitated percutaneous coronary intervention for the treatment of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.
Why the study?
Does thrombolytic therapy facilitate or foil primary PCI in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction?
Does thrombolytic therapy facilitate or foil primary PCI in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction?
This editorial discusses the rationale and challenges of facilitated PCI (thrombolysis prior to primary PCI) for STEMI patients facing treatment delays.
Sir Winston Churchill once said, “It's not enough that we do our best; sometimes we have to do what is required.” Such a sentiment underlies the premise of facilitated percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), a therapeutic strategy of pharmacologic thrombolysis before mechanical intervention for the treatment of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Despite our best efforts to provide timely primary PCI to improve myocardial salvage, patient-related delays to presentation, the necessity for transfer of the patient to a facility capable of performing PCI, and presentation of the patient to the hospital during off-hours may all conspire to extend the time from the . . .
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jane A. Leopold (2008) conducted an editorial in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Facilitated percutaneous coronary intervention (pharmacologic thrombolysis before mechanical intervention) was evaluated. This editorial discusses the premise and logistical challenges of facilitated percutaneous coronary intervention for the treatment of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: