Heart 1999;81:598-602 ( June )

Relevance of clinical trial results in myocardial infarction to medical practice: comparison of four year outcome in participants of a thrombolytic trial, patients receiving routine thrombolysis, and those deemed ineligible for thrombolysis

N Brown^a, M Melville^a, D Gray^a, T Young^b, A M Skene^b, R G Wilcox^a, J R Hampton^a

^a Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, University Hospital, Nottingham NG7 2UH, UK, ^b British Heart Foundation Cardiovascular Statistics Unit, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK

Correspondence to: Dr Brown.

Accepted for publication 29 January 1999

OBJECTIVETo assess the medium to long term outcome of patients ineligible for thrombolysis compared to those enrolled in a clinical trial of thrombolysis and patients receiving non-trial thrombolysis.
DESIGNCohort study based on the Nottingham heart attack register.
SETTINGTwo district general hospitals serving a defined urban/rural population.
SUBJECTSAll patients admitted with a confirmed acute myocardial infarction during 1992 categorised as either participants of a thrombolytic trial (group A, n = 140), receiving non-trial thrombolysis (group B, n = 329), or deemed ineligible for lytic treatment (group C, n = 431).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURESBackground characteristics, inhospital treatment, patterns of follow up, referrals to cardiologists, revascularisation rates, and short and long term survival.
RESULTSClinical trial recruits were younger by almost 10 years, were less likely to have a previous history of myocardial infarction, and more likely to be in Killip class 1 on admission than those ineligible for thrombolysis. Cardiology follow up was mandatory for all surviving trial participants but 22% of patients in group B and 31% of patients in group C received no follow up, and during four years less than 50% ever saw a cardiologist. Revascularisation was performed in 17.2% of patients in group A, 13.6% of patients in group B, and 7.5% of patients in group C. Cumulative mortality at a median of four years was 24.3% in group A, 36.8% in B, and 59.6% in group C. Adjusting for age, sex, previous myocardial infarction, type of infarction, and Killip class in a logistic regression model the odds ratios (OR) of death at four years for groups B and C were 1.60 (95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.97 to 2.63, p = 0.065) and 2.64 (95% CI 1.61 to 4.32, p < 0.001), respectively, when compared to group A (OR 1).
CONCLUSIONSPatients enrolled into thrombolytic trials are at low risk. Patients deemed ineligible for thrombolysis are high risk, receive less surveillance, are less likely to be revascularised or receive trial proven treatments, have a poor long term outcome not entirely explained by increased age or severity of infarction, and deserve further evaluation.


Keywords: myocardial infarction; thrombolysis; clinical trials

---

© 1999 by Heart
CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Shah, B., Hernandez, A. F., Liang, L., Al-Khatib, S. M., Yancy, C. W., Fonarow, G. C., Peterson, E. D., on behalf of the Get With The Guidelines Steering, (2009). Hospital Variation and Characteristics of Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Use in Patients With Heart Failure Data From the GWTG-HF (Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure) Registry.. J Am Coll Cardiol 53: 416-422 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Nallamothu, B. K., Hayward, R. A., Bates, E. R. (2008). Beyond the Randomized Clinical Trial: The Role of Effectiveness Studies in Evaluating Cardiovascular Therapies. Circulation 118: 1294-1303 [Full Text]  
• Steg, P. G., Lopez-Sendon, J., Lopez de Sa, E., Goodman, S. G., Gore, J. M., Anderson, F. A. Jr, Himbert, D., Allegrone, J., Van de Werf, F., for the GRACE Investigators, (2007). External Validity of Clinical Trials in Acute Myocardial Infarction. Arch Intern Med 167: 68-73 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Roth-Cline, M. D. (2006). Clinical Trials in the Wake of Vioxx: Requiring Statistically Extreme Evidence of Benefit to Ensure the Safety of New Drugs. Circulation 113: 2253-2259 [Full Text]  
• Terkelsen, C. J., Lassen, J. F., Norgaard, B. L., Gerdes, J. C., Jensen, T., Gotzsche, L. B.-H., Nielsen, T. T., Andersen, H. R. (2005). Mortality rates in patients with ST-elevation vs. non-ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction: observations from an unselected cohort. Eur Heart J 26: 18-26 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Kastrati, A., Mehilli, J., Nekolla, S., Bollwein, H., Martinoff, S., Pache, J., Schuhlen, H., Seyfarth, M., Gawaz, M., Neumann, F.-J., Dirschinger, J., Schwaiger, M., Schomig, A., STOPAMI-3 Study Investigators, (2004). A randomized trial comparing myocardial salvage achieved by coronary stenting versus balloon angioplasty in patients with acute myocardial infarction considered ineligible for reperfusion therapy. J Am Coll Cardiol 43: 734-741 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• HAMPTON, J. (2001). Immediate angioplasty for the National Health Service?. Heart 86: 241-242 [Full Text]  
• Higano, S.T., Gersh, B.J. (2000). Coronary angiography and outcome following acute myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J 21: 707-709