Comparison of Emergency Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Intravenous Thrombolysis with Urokinase Combined with Emergency Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Acute Myocardial Infarction

韩立宪,王贵松,徐泽升,高巍,张军,马增才,彭万忠,崔海英,李洪稳,周继新,王玉刚,尚爱英,元柏民
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1004-8812.2002.04.016
2002-01-01
Abstract:Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of intravenous thrombolysis with urokinase combined with emergency interventional therapy for acute myocardial infarction(AMI). Methods Fifty two patients with first AMI (≤12 h from onset)were randomized to thrombolysis plus PCI group and primary PCI group,the patency rate of infarct related artery (IRA) before intervention,the procedural success rate,the incidence of bleeding complications and acute ischemic events during hospitalization and the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) measured by echocardiography before discharge were compared.Results The IRA patency rate in the thrombolysis plus PCI group (61 5%) was significantly higher than that in the primary PCI group (19 2%) ( P 0 05),the procedural success rate was 100% with TIMI Ⅲ flow of 92 2% and 91 5% in the two groups ( P 0 05),no major bleeding complication and acute ischemic event occurred during hospitalization in both groups,the LVEF in the thrombolysis plus PCI group (64 3±5 6)% was higher than that in the primary PCI group(54 8±4 9)% before discharge ( P 0 05).Conclusion Intravenous thrombolysis with urokinase combined with emergency interventional therapy for AMI was safe and effective with a higher early patency rate,better cardiac function and no major bleeding complications.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?