Since the initial clinical description by Tillett and associates1more than 40 years ago, thrombolytic therapy has been hoveringon the outskirts of medical practice. Despite intense interestby the pharmaceutical industry and a plethora of anecdotal clinicalreports, thrombolysis has found a generally accepted role onlyin the treatment of acute coronary thrombosis. The treatmentof ischemic stroke within a few hours after onset may be anotherindication,2 although this use of thrombolytic therapy is stillbeing investigated.
To date, no convincing evidence has demonstrated the superiorityof thrombolytic therapy over conventional therapy for venousthromboembolism or peripheral arterial . . . [Full Text of this Article]
Jain, D., Kurz, T., Katus, H. A., Richardt, G.
(2001). A Unique Complication During Coronary Angiography: Peripheral Embolism by Selective Right Coronary Engagement: A Case Report. ANGIOLOGY
52: 493-499
[Abstract]
Zarins, C. K., Gurewich, V., Ouriel, K., Porter, J. M.
(1998). A Comparison of Recombinant Urokinase with Vascular Surgery for Acute Arterial Occlusion of the Legs. NEJM
339: 564-565
[Full Text]
(1998). Thrombolysis vs. Surgery for Acute Arterial Occlusion of the Legs. JWatch General
1998: 5-5
[Full Text]