Taylor G J, Mikell F L, Moses H W, Dove J T, Batchelder J E, Thull A, Hansen S, Wellons H A, Schneider J A
Am J Cardiol. 1984 Aug 1;54(3):256-60. doi: 10.1016/0002-9149(84)90177-2.
A consecutive series of 184 patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) received thrombolytic therapy. The first 63 were treated in the catheterization laboratory with intracoronary streptokinase (IC-STK), and 44 (70%) had successful thrombolysis. One hundred twenty-one patients received intravenous (IV) STK immediately after diagnosis of AMI, and 99 (82%) were found to have an open infarct artery. Only 58% of patients (14 of 24) who required transfer from out-of-town hospitals for IC-STK treatment had successful thrombolysis; in contrast, IV-STK given in the local hospital resulted in an 85% (72 of 85) rate of thrombolysis (p = 0.005). IV-STK thus appears at least as effective as IC-STK for AMI and is more effective for patients treated in hospitals without catheterization facilities.
连续184例急性心肌梗死（AMI）患者接受了溶栓治疗。前63例在导管室接受冠状动脉内链激酶（IC-STK）治疗，44例（70%）溶栓成功。121例AMI诊断后立即接受静脉内（IV）链激酶治疗，99例（82%）梗死动脉开通。需要从外地医院转来接受IC-STK治疗的患者中，仅58%（24例中的14例）溶栓成功；相比之下，在当地医院给予IV-STK，溶栓率为85%（85例中的72例）（p = 0.005）。因此，IV-STK治疗AMI至少与IC-STK一样有效，对没有导管设施的医院治疗的患者更有效。
