Article Text

Download PDFPDF
  1. Iqbal Malik, Editor

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.


Rescue angioplasty: should we or shouldn’t we? ▸

Although primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is a proven therapeutic approach in ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and is used increasingly, intravenous thrombolysis remains the first line treatment in 30–70% of cases worldwide. However, thrombolysis results in a grade 3 flow, according to the thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) classification system, in only 60% of patients, even with current fibrin specific agents. To date, it has been unclear how best to treat the remaining patients, in whom thrombolysis has not worked. In a randomised trial involving 427 patients with STEMI of < 6 hours’ duration treated with thrombolysis, in whom reperfusion failed to occur (< 50% ST segment resolution) within 90 minutes, patients were randomly assigned to repeated thrombolysis (142 patients), conservative treatment (141 patients), or rescue PCI (144 patients). The primary end point was a composite of death, reinfarction, stroke, or severe heart failure within six months. The rate of event-free survival among patients treated with rescue PCI was 84.6%, as compared with 70.1% among those receiving conservative treatment and 68.7% among those undergoing repeated thrombolysis (overall p  =  0.004). The adjusted hazard ratio for the occurrence of the primary end point for repeated thrombolysis versus conservative treatment was 1.09 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71 to 1.67; p  =  0.69), as compared with adjusted hazard ratios of 0.43 (95% CI 0.26 to 0.72; p  =  0.001) for rescue PCI versus repeated thrombolysis and 0.47 (95% 0.28 to 0.79; p  =  0.004) for rescue PCI versus conservative treatment. There were no significant differences in mortality from all causes. Non-fatal bleeding, mostly at the sheath insertion site, was more common with rescue PCI, although mortality related to bleeding was higher in the other two groups. At six months, 86.2% of the rescue PCI group were free from revascularisation, as compared with …

View Full Text