The New England Journal of Medicine
e-mail icon  FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |    Advanced Search
Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe
 
Original Article
Volume 335:1253-1260 October 24, 1996 Number 17
NextNext

A Comparison of Thrombolytic Therapy with Primary Coronary Angioplasty for Acute Myocardial Infarction
Nathan R. Every, M.D., M.P.H., Lori S. Parsons, B.S., Mark Hlatky, M.D., Jenny S. Martin, R.N., W. Douglas Weaver, M.D., for The Myocardial Infarction Triage and Intervention Investigators

 Sign up for free e-toc
 

This Article
-Full Text
- PDF

Commentary
-Letters
-Letters

Tools and Services
-Add to Personal Archive
-Add to Citation Manager
-Notify a Friend
-E-mail When Cited

More Information
-PubMed Citation
ABSTRACT

Background Several relatively small randomized trials have shown that primary angioplasty results in a better short-term outcome than thrombolytic therapy in patients with acute myocardial infarction. These results, however, have not been duplicated other than in investigational trials.

Methods We compared mortality during hospitalization and long-term mortality, as well as the use of resources, among 1050 patients in a primary-angioplasty group and 2095 patients in a thrombolytic-therapy group. Patients were selected from the Myocardial Infarction Triage and Intervention Project Registry cohort of 12,331 consecutive patients admitted with acute myocardial infarction to 19 Seattle hospitals between 1988 and 1994. Because of the potential for selection bias, several subgroup analyses were performed that included patients eligible for thrombolysis, high-risk patients, and patients in the primary-angioplasty group who were treated at hospitals with high volumes of angioplasty.

Results There was no significant difference in mortality during hospitalization or long-term follow-up between patients in the thrombolytic-therapy group and those in the primary-angioplasty group (mortality during hospitalization, 5.6 percent and 5.5 percent, respectively; P = 0.93; adjusted hazard ratio for the risk of death within three years after primary angioplasty, 0.95; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.8 to 1.2). There was also no significant difference in mortality between high-risk subgroups of patients in the two treatment groups. The rates of procedures and costs were lower among patients in the thrombolytic-therapy group both at the time of hospital discharge and after three years of follow-up (30 percent fewer coronary angiograms, 15 percent fewer coronary angioplasties, and 13 percent lower costs after three years of follow-up).

Conclusions In a community setting, we observed no benefit in terms of either mortality or the use of resources with a strategy of primary angioplasty rather than thrombolytic therapy in a large cohort of patients with acute myocardial infarction.


Source Information

From the Northwest Health Services Research and Development Field Program, Seattle Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Seattle (N.R.E.); the Department of Health Policy, Stanford University, Stanford, Calif. (M.H.); and the Myocardial Infarction Triage and Intervention Project, Division of Cardiology, University of Washington, Seattle (L.S.P., J.S.M., W.D.W.).

Address reprint requests to Dr. Every at the MITI Coordinating Center, 1910 Fairview Ave. E., Ste. 205, Seattle, WA 98102.

Full Text of this Article


Related Letters:

Thrombolysis or Primary Angioplasty for Acute Myocardial Infarction?
Zijlstra F., Hoorntje J. C.A., de Boer M.-J., Magalski A., O'Keefe J. H., Leff B., Lange R. A., Hillis L. D., Grines C. L.
Extract | Full Text  
N Engl J Med 1997; 336:1101-1103, Apr 10, 1997. Correspondence

A Comparison of Thrombolytic Therapy with Primary Coronary Angioplasty for Acute Myocardial Infarction
Lee J. S., Fath-Ordoubadi F., Beatt K. J., Every N. R., Weaver W. D.
Extract | Full Text  
N Engl J Med 1997; 336:1103-1104, Apr 10, 1997. Correspondence

This article has been cited by other articles:



HOME  |  SUBSCRIBE  |  SEARCH  |  CURRENT ISSUE  |  PAST ISSUES  |  COLLECTIONS  |  PRIVACY  |  HELP  |  beta.nejm.org

Comments and questions? Please contact us.

The New England Journal of Medicine is owned, published, and copyrighted © 2008 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.