Suppr超能文献

急性心肌梗死中冠状动脉血管成形术与纤维蛋白溶解疗法的比较。

A comparison of coronary angioplasty with fibrinolytic therapy in acute myocardial infarction.

作者信息

Andersen Henning R, Nielsen Torsten T, Rasmussen Klaus, Thuesen Leif, Kelbaek Henning, Thayssen Per, Abildgaard Ulrik, Pedersen Flemming, Madsen Jan K, Grande Peer, Villadsen Anton B, Krusell Lars R, Haghfelt Torben, Lomholt Preben, Husted Steen E, Vigholt Else, Kjaergard Henrik K, Mortensen Leif Spange

机构信息

Department of Cardiology at Skejby Hospital, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.

出版信息

N Engl J Med. 2003 Aug 21;349(8):733-42. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa025142.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

For the treatment of myocardial infarction with ST-segment elevation, primary angioplasty is considered superior to fibrinolysis for patients who are admitted to hospitals with angioplasty facilities. Whether this benefit is maintained for patients who require transportation from a community hospital to a center where invasive treatment is available is uncertain.

METHODS

We randomly assigned 1572 patients with acute myocardial infarction to treatment with angioplasty or accelerated treatment with intravenous alteplase; 1129 patients were enrolled at 24 referral hospitals and 443 patients at 5 invasive-treatment centers. The primary study end point was a composite of death, clinical evidence of reinfarction, or disabling stroke at 30 days.

RESULTS

Among patients who underwent randomization at referral hospitals, the primary end point was reached in 8.5 percent of the patients in the angioplasty group, as compared with 14.2 percent of those in the fibrinolysis group (P=0.002). The results were similar among patients who were enrolled at invasive-treatment centers: 6.7 percent of the patients in the angioplasty group reached the primary end point, as compared with 12.3 percent in the fibrinolysis group (P=0.05). Among all patients, the better outcome after angioplasty was driven primarily by a reduction in the rate of reinfarction (1.6 percent in the angioplasty group vs. 6.3 percent in the fibrinolysis group, P<0.001); no significant differences were observed in the rate of death (6.6 percent vs. 7.8 percent, P=0.35) or the rate of stroke (1.1 percent vs. 2.0 percent, P=0.15). Ninety-six percent of patients were transferred from referral hospitals to an invasive-treatment center within two hours.

CONCLUSIONS

A strategy for reperfusion involving the transfer of patients to an invasive-treatment center for primary angioplasty is superior to on-site fibrinolysis, provided that the transfer takes two hours or less.

摘要

背景

对于ST段抬高型心肌梗死的治疗,对于入住具备血管成形术设备医院的患者,直接血管成形术被认为优于纤维蛋白溶解疗法。对于那些需要从社区医院转运至能够进行侵入性治疗中心的患者,这种益处是否依然存在尚不确定。

方法

我们将1572例急性心肌梗死患者随机分配接受血管成形术治疗或静脉注射阿替普酶加速治疗;1129例患者在24家转诊医院入组,443例患者在5家侵入性治疗中心入组。主要研究终点为30天时死亡、再梗死的临床证据或致残性卒中的复合终点。

结果

在转诊医院接受随机分组的患者中,血管成形术组8.5%的患者达到主要终点,而纤维蛋白溶解疗法组为14.2%(P = 0.002)。在侵入性治疗中心入组的患者中结果相似:血管成形术组6.7%的患者达到主要终点,而纤维蛋白溶解疗法组为12.3%(P = 0.05)。在所有患者中,血管成形术后更好的结局主要是由于再梗死率降低(血管成形术组为1.6%,纤维蛋白溶解疗法组为6.3%,P<0.001);在死亡率(6.6%对7.8%,P = 0.35)或卒中率(1.1%对2.0%,P = 0.15)方面未观察到显著差异。96%的患者在两小时内从转诊医院转运至侵入性治疗中心。

结论

对于再灌注策略,若将患者转运至侵入性治疗中心进行直接血管成形术,且转运时间在两小时或更短时间内,则优于就地纤维蛋白溶解疗法。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验