A Systematic Review of the Efficacy and Safety of Tenecteplase Versus Streptokinase in the Management of Myocardial Infarction in Developing Countries.

Myocardial infarction (MI) is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in low- and middle-income countries. Fibrinolytic agents and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are the main approaches for the recanalization and reperfusion of the myocardium following MI. Many studies have shown that PCI is superior to thrombolytics due to better outcomes and decreased mortality. Nevertheless, PCI's mortality gain over thrombolysis decreases as the time between presentation and PCI procedure increases. Furthermore, PCI is not widely available in most developing countries; thus, it cannot be delivered promptly. Most patients in developing countries cannot afford the cost of PCI. Thus, thrombolytic therapy remains essential to managing MI in developing countries and should not be disregarded. Tenecteplase (TNK) and streptokinase (SK) are the two most widely used fibrinolytics in managing MI in underdeveloped nations. Despite their widespread availability, comparative studies on them have been inconclusive. This study aims to review the available literature on the effectiveness and safety of TNK versus SK in managing MI in resource-poor nations. The study is reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) extension and analyzed according to Cochrane guidelines on synthesis without meta-analysis. A comprehensive literature search for studies comparing TNK and STK was conducted on EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CINAHL, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Ovid version of MEDLINE databases. A reference list of the eligible articles and systematic reviews was also screened. A narrative synthesis of the available data was done by representing the data on the effect direction plot, followed by vote counting. Of the 2284 references retrieved from the databases, only 17 studies met the inclusion criteria and were selected for final analysis. The study suggested that TNK is more effective in complete ST-segment resolution (80% vs 10% on the effect direction plot) and symptom relief (80% vs 20%) than SK. SK and TNK were comparable in achieving successful fibrinolysis (50% vs 50%). For the safety parameters, TNK is associated with a lesser risk of major bleeding than SK (88.9% vs 11.1%) and minor bleeding (25% vs 75%). SK was linked with a higher risk of hypotension/shock (77.8% vs 11.1%) and anaphylaxis/allergy (100% vs 0%). Long-term mortality was higher in the SK arm (100% vs 0%). In-hospital mortality is comparable between the two agents (37.5% vs 37.5%). There is conflicting evidence regarding other safety and efficacy endpoints. Compared to SK, TNK results in better complete ST-segment resolution and symptom relief. A higher risk of long-term mortality, increased risk of major and minor bleeding, hypotension, and allergy/anaphylaxis was observed in patients who received SK. Both agents were comparable in terms of in-hospital mortality and successful fibrinolysis. Controversy exists regarding which agent is linked with increased risk of 30-35-day mortality benefit and stroke. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with large sample sizes are needed to establish TNK vs SK superiority in efficacy and safety. The long-term duration of follow-up of the mortality rate of the two agents is also essential, as most patients in these regions cannot afford the recommended PCI post-fibrinolysis.