Do patients with heart failure appropriately undergo invasive procedures post‐myocardial infarction? Results from a prospective multicentre study

Tobing, Daniel; French, Jordan; Varigos, John; Meehan, Adam David; Billah, Baki; Krum, Henry

doi:10.1111/j.1445-5994.2007.01594.x

Cited by 5 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In registry studies of fibrinolytic-treated patients from Western Europe, high rates of in-hospital angiography and PCI are reported 11. Also a recent 20-centre Australian survey showed that after STEMI, 87% of patients underwent in-hospital angiography, with 65% having PCI 37. The WEST (Which Early ST elevation myocardial infarction Therapy) trial supports an approach of urgent, but non-immediate, post-fibrinolytic PCI 38.…”

Section: Timing Of Non-emergency Angiography and Interventionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The pharmaco-invasive approach to STEMI: when should fibrinolytic-treated patients go to the “cath lab”?

Edmond

Juergens²,

French³

2009

Postgraduate Medical Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in clinical trials has lower rates of reinfarction, stroke and mortality than fibrinolytic therapy, because of system delays in routine practice, field triage and prehospital administration of fibrinolytic therapy may lead to similar clinical outcomes, especially in those patients who present in the first 2 h after symptom onset. Necessary for these outcomes is the liberal use of both rescue PCI and in-hospital revascularisation. Non-invasive prediction of failed reperfusion may be enhanced by the use of ST recovery, patient characteristics and troponin T levels, measured by point-of-care assays. This review focuses on the timing of, and indications for, an invasive strategy after fibrinolytic therapy, including that for failed pharmacological reperfusion.

show abstract

Section: Timing Of Non-emergency Angiography and Interventionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The pharmaco-invasive approach to STEMI: when should fibrinolytic-treated patients go to the “cath lab”?

Edmond

Juergens²,

French³

2009

Postgraduate Medical Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Bare-metal stenting of large coronary arteries in ST-elevation myocardial infarction is associated with low rates of target vessel revascularization

Shugman¹,

Hee²,

Mussap³

et al. 2013

American Heart Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Late outcomes of ST-elevation myocardial infarction treated by pharmaco-invasive or primary percutaneous coronary intervention

Jamal

Idris

Faour

et al. 2022

European Heart Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims Pharmaco-invasive percutaneous coronary intervention (PI-PCI) is recommended for patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI)who are unable to undergo timely primary PCI (pPCI). The present study examined late outcomes after PI-PCI (successful reperfusion followed by scheduled PCI or failed reperfusion and rescue PCI)compared with timely and late pPCI (>120 min from first medical contact). Methods and results All patients with STEMI presenting within 12 h of symptom onset, who underwent PCI during their initial hospitalization at Liverpool Hospital (Sydney), from October 2003 to March 2014, were included. Amongst 2091 STEMI patients (80% male), 1077 (52%)underwent pPCI (68% timely, 32% late), and 1014 (48%)received PI-PCI (33% rescue, 67% scheduled). Mortality at 3 years was 11.1% after pPCI (6.7% timely, 20.2% late) and 6.2% after PI-PCI (9.4% rescue, 4.8% scheduled); P < 0.01. After propensity matching, the adjusted mortality hazard ratio (HR) for timely pPCI compared with scheduled PCI was 0.9 (95% CIs 0.4–2.0) and compared with rescue PCI was 0.5 (95% CIs 0.2–0.9). The adjusted mortality HR for late pPCI, compared with scheduled PCI was 2.2 (95% CIs 1.2–3.1)and compared with rescue PCI, it was 1.5 (95% CIs 0.7–2.0). Conclusion Patients who underwent late pPCI had higher mortality rates than those undergoing a pharmaco-invasive strategy. Despite rescue PCI being required in a third of patients, a pharmaco-invasive approach should be considered when delays to PCI are anticipated, as it achieves better outcomes than late pPCI.

show abstract

Do patients with heart failure appropriately undergo invasive procedures post‐myocardial infarction? Results from a prospective multicentre study

Cited by 5 publications

References 44 publications

The pharmaco-invasive approach to STEMI: when should fibrinolytic-treated patients go to the “cath lab”?

The pharmaco-invasive approach to STEMI: when should fibrinolytic-treated patients go to the “cath lab”?

Bare-metal stenting of large coronary arteries in ST-elevation myocardial infarction is associated with low rates of target vessel revascularization

Late outcomes of ST-elevation myocardial infarction treated by pharmaco-invasive or primary percutaneous coronary intervention

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About