Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
BMJ 2004;328:1256-1257 (22 May), doi:10.1136/bmj.328.7450.1256
Kevin S Channer, consultant cardiologist
Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield S10 2JF kevin.channer@sth.nhs.uk
The UK government is considering establishing a national primary angioplasty service for patients with acute myocardial infarction. David Smith and Kevin Channer debate whether moving away from first line thrombolysis is appropriate or practical
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
Thrombolysis is the established treatment for patients with an acute ST segment elevation myocardial infarction based on large trials in the past two decades.1 Studies show that treatment within an hour after onset of symptoms results in a 6.5% absolute reduction in mortality compared with placebo; this benefit falls quickly with time to 3.7% at 1-2 hours, 2.6% at 2-3 hours, 2.9% at 3-6 hours, 1.8% at 6-12 hours, and 0.9% at 12-24 hours.2 However, thrombolysis also causes an absolute increase in stroke of 0.4% (half of which are fatal), an absolute increase of 0.7% in major non-cerebral bleeds, and a 3% increase in early non-fatal reinfarction.1
Although thrombolysis saves lives in hospital, it has no later benefits; the survival curves of patients given placebo or thrombolysis exactly superimpose after 35 days, or even after discharge from hospital.3
4 The mechanism for the reduction in hospital mortality is unclear since all
![]()
CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
StumbleUpon
Technorati
Twitter What's this?
Read all Rapid Responses