Yerasi Charan, Case Brian C, Forrestal Brian J, Chezar-Azerrad Chava, Hashim Hayder, Ben-Dor Itsik, Satler Lowell F, Mintz Gary S, Waksman Ron
Section of Interventional Cardiology, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC, United States of America.
Section of Interventional Cardiology, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC, United States of America.
Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2020 Aug;21(8):1024-1029. doi: 10.1016/j.carrev.2020.05.027. Epub 2020 May 21.
The number of cases of the coronavirus-induced disease-2019 (COVID-19) continues to increase exponentially worldwide. In this crisis situation, the management of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is challenging. In this review, we outline the risks and benefits of primary PCI vs. thrombolysis for STEMI. While thrombolysis may seem like a good choice, many patients have a contraindication and could end up using more resources. Also, with a high probability of the angiogram showing non-obstructed coronary arteries during acute infections, primary PCI should be the preferred strategy.
新型冠状病毒引发的疾病-2019(COVID-19)病例数在全球范围内持续呈指数级增长。在这种危机情况下,ST段抬高型心肌梗死(STEMI)的治疗具有挑战性。在本综述中,我们概述了STEMI患者直接经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)与溶栓治疗的风险和益处。虽然溶栓治疗看似是个不错的选择,但许多患者存在禁忌证,最终可能会消耗更多资源。此外,在急性感染期间血管造影显示冠状动脉无阻塞的可能性很高,因此直接PCI应作为首选策略。