Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T12:58:42.887Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Prehospital Thrombolysis in Acute Myocardial Infarction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 June 2012

Sergey Yu Varshavsky
Sergey Yu Varshavsky
Affiliation:
Research Institute of Cardiology and City Emergency Care Station, St. Petersburg, USSR
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Introduction:

The effectiveness and safety of thrombolytic treatment (TT) for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in the prehospital setting have not been defined. Therefore, its use on a mobile coronary care unit (MCCU) was studied.

Methods:

A MCCU was provided with the equipment and supplies necessary for the administration TT and its personnel were trained in the indications for TT and in its administration. When an emergency medical team physician suspected the diagnosis from the presence of chest pain typical of an AMI, the patient's ECG was transmitted to the Cardiological Consulting Center. If the S-T segments were elevated and the patient met all of the screening criteria, the cardiologist ordered the MCCU personnel to carry out TT. Streptokinase (Avelyzin, Germed, GDR) was administered intravenously at a dose of 500,000 UE.

Results:

Sixty-seven patients with AMI were included in the trial. The mean interval between the onset of the symptoms and the beginning of the TT was 156±77 minutes; it was less than 3 hours for 54 patients. Thirty-four patients (50.7%) had non-invasive markers of successful reperfusion, while 33 (49.3%) did not. Three patients had non-fatal ventricular fibrillation (VF), ventricular tachycardia (VT) and/or ventricular premature beats of high grades (Lown classes 3–5) developed in six and 22 patients respectively. Five patients had conduction disturbances, and 40 had symptomatic hypotension. None of the patients died before arrival at the hospital. Four suffered reinfarction, and one died of VF during the in-hospital phase of care. Post-discharge follow-up (17.5±5.0 months) demonstrated a positive exercise test in 23 (43%), and a left ventricular ejection fraction >80% in 29 (85.2%) and <40% in five (14.8%) of the patients. The in-hospital and post-discharge mortalities were 1.5 and 4.8% respectively. There was not a single case of bleeding sufficient to require a transfusion.

Conclusions:

The study indicates that the administration of TT for AMI in the prehospital setting is both safe and effective.

Type
Brief Report
Information
Prehospital and Disaster Medicine , Volume 7 , Issue 1 , March 1992 , pp. 57 - 59
Copyright
Copyright © World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Chasov, IE, Matveeva, LS, Masaev, AV et al. : Intracoronary administration of fibrinolysin in acute myocardial infarction. Ter Archiv 1978;4:8–19.Google Scholar
2. Mathey, DG, Schofer, J, Blelfeld, W: Zeitabhangigkeit der Myokarderhaltung nach Thrombolyse. Dtsch Med Wsch 1985;110:1681–1685.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. van de Loo, JCW: Intravenous streptokinase in acute myocardial infarction: Lessons from early trials. Europ Heart J 1985;5.Google Scholar
4. Alderman, EL, Jutzy, KR, Berte, LE et al. : Randomized comparison of intravenous versus intracoronary streptokinase for myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol 1984;54:14–19.Google Scholar
5. Yusuf, S, Collins, R, Peto, R et al. : Intravenous and intracoronary fibrinolytic therapy in acute myocardial infarction: Overview of results on mortality, reinfarction, and side-effects from 33 randomized controlled trials. Europ Heart J 1986;6:556–585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Hartmann, JR, McCeever, LM, Buffalino, VB et al. : Intravenous streptokinase in acute myocardial infarction in experience of community hospitals served by paramedics. Am Heart J 1986;111:1030–1034.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7. Ganelina, IE, Shalnev, VI, Derigina, GP et al. : “Experience of Early Thrombolytic Treatment in Acute Myocardial Infarction,” in Diagnostics and Treatment of Myocardial Infarction: Proceedings of the Conference, June 11–12 1987, Tbilisi, USSR.Google Scholar
8. Varshavsky, S Yu, Vasilkova, EA, Emelianov, AV et al. : “Experience of Prehospital Thrombolytic Treatment in Acute Myocardial Infarction,” in Urgent Diagnostics and Intensive Care in Cardiology. Leningrad, 1989.Google Scholar
9. European Myocardial Infarction Project (EMIP): Potential time saving with prehospital intervention in acute myocardial infarction: Report of the sub-committee. Europ Heart J 1989;8:118–124.Google Scholar
10. ISIS-2 Collaborative Group: Randomized trial of intravenous streptokinase, oral aspirin, both, or neither among 17,187 cases of suspected acute myocardial infarction. Lancet 1988;ii:349–360.Google Scholar
11. Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio delta Soprauuivnza neli'Infardo Miocardico (GISSI-2): A factorial randomized trail of alteplase verus streptolemaise and herparin versus no heparin among 12490 patients with acute myocardial infarction. Lancet 1990;336:71–75.Google Scholar
12. GISSI: Effectiveness of intravenous thrombolytic therapy. Lancet 1986 ii:397–401.Google Scholar
13. ISAM Study Group: A prospective trial of intravenous streptokinase in acute myocardial infarction: Mortality, morbidity and infarct size at 21 days. N Engl J Med 1986;314:1465–1471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar