Faculty of Pharmacy, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur Campus, Jalan Raja Muda Abdul Aziz, 50300, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Pharmacy Department, Hospital Kuala Lumpur, Ministry of Health Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Int J Clin Pharm. 2022 Jun;44(3):641-650. doi: 10.1007/s11096-022-01383-x. Epub 2022 Mar 3.
Background Fibrinolysis using streptokinase or tenecteplase remains the primary reperfusion strategy for ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in many Asian countries, including Malaysia. Comparative outcomes of these two fibrinolytic agents in the Asian population were inconclusive despite being widely used. Aim We aimed to assess and compare the outcomes of streptokinase versus tenecteplase in STEMI reperfusion of an Asian population. Method This single-centre retrospective study analysed data on STEMI patients who received fibrinolytic therapy from 2016 to 2020 in the Emergency Department of the largest tertiary hospital in Malaysia. Total population sampling was used in this study. Based on the propensity score matching, 359 patients receiving streptokinase were matched against 359 patients receiving tenecteplase by incorporating 16 variables that potentially affect mortality. 30-day mortality, stroke and major bleeding were the primary outcome measures. Results There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality between streptokinase (n = 39, 11.2%) and tenecteplase (n = 46, 13.2%) groups (p = 0.418). The rates of ischemic strokes [streptokinase (n = 1, 0.3%) versus tenecteplase (n = 3, 0.9%), p = 0.624], intracranial haemorrhage [streptokinase (n = 3, 0.9%) versus tenecteplase (n = 1, 0.3%), p = 0.624] and major bleeding [streptokinase (n = 4, 1.1%) versus tenecteplase (n = 3, 0.9%), p = 0.624], were comparable for the two groups. The incidences of failed thrombolysis were significantly higher in the tenecteplase arm. Hypotension and allergic reaction were significantly higher in the streptokinase arm. Conclusion Streptokinase and tenecteplase are fibrinolytic agents with similar efficacy and safety in STEMI reperfusion therapy in our Asian population.
在包括马来西亚在内的许多亚洲国家,使用链激酶或替奈普酶进行纤维蛋白溶解仍然是 ST 段抬高型心肌梗死(STEMI)的主要再灌注策略。尽管这两种纤维蛋白溶解剂在亚洲人群中被广泛应用,但它们的疗效比较结果尚无定论。目的:评估并比较链激酶与替奈普酶在亚洲人群 STEMI 再灌注中的疗效。方法:这项单中心回顾性研究分析了 2016 年至 2020 年期间在马来西亚最大的三级医院急诊科接受纤维蛋白溶解治疗的 STEMI 患者的数据。本研究采用总体人群抽样。基于倾向评分匹配,将 359 例接受链激酶治疗的患者与 359 例接受替奈普酶治疗的患者进行匹配,共纳入 16 个可能影响死亡率的变量。30 天死亡率、卒中和大出血是主要的结局指标。结果:链激酶组(n=39,11.2%)和替奈普酶组(n=46,13.2%)的 30 天死亡率无显著差异(p=0.418)。缺血性卒中发生率[链激酶组(n=1,0.3%)与替奈普酶组(n=3,0.9%),p=0.624]、颅内出血发生率[链激酶组(n=3,0.9%)与替奈普酶组(n=1,0.3%),p=0.624]和大出血发生率[链激酶组(n=4,1.1%)与替奈普酶组(n=3,0.9%),p=0.624]在两组间相似。替奈普酶组的溶栓失败发生率显著更高。链激酶组低血压和过敏反应发生率显著更高。结论:链激酶和替奈普酶在亚洲人群的 STEMI 再灌注治疗中疗效和安全性相似。