Download PDF
Hamostaseologie 2006; 26(02): 131-137
DOI: 10.1055/s-0037-1616885
Original article
Schattauer GmbH

Akuter Myokardinfarkt mit persistierender ST-Elevation

Primäre PCI oder Lyse?Acute ST-elevation myocardial infactionIs primary PCI superior to thrombolysis?
C. Dellas
1   Abteilung Kardiologie und Pneumologie, Klinikum der Georg-August-Universität Göttingen
,
S. Konstantinides
1   Abteilung Kardiologie und Pneumologie, Klinikum der Georg-August-Universität Göttingen
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
27 December 2017 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Die Thrombolyse ist eine längst etablierte Therapie des akuten Myokardinfarktes mit persistierender ST-Elevation (STEMI). Von dieser Therapieform profitieren jedoch überwiegend Patienten, die innerhalb der ersten zwei Stunden nach Beginn der Symptomatik behandelt werden. Im Gegensatz zur Thrombolyse ist die Effektivität der mechanischen Rekanalisation (PCI) in Bezug auf die komplette Reperfusion sehr hoch und unabhängig von der Dauer der Symptomatik. Nach den Ergebnissen kürzlich veröffentlichter Untersuchungen scheinen Patienten mit STEMI mehr von einer sofortigen Verlegung in ein PCI-Zentrum als von einer Thrombolyse vor Ort zu profitieren. Diese Strategie wird daher grundsätzlich in den aktualisierten Leitlinien deutscher und internationaler Fachgesellschaften befürwortet. Der transportbedingte Zeitverlust darf allerdings nicht länger als 60 bis 90 Minuten betragen.

Summary

Thrombolysis is an established treatment of acute myocardial infarction with persistent ST elevation (STEMI). Thrombolytic agents are most effective in patients who can be treated within two hours of symptom onset. On the other hand, the efficacy of mechanical recanalization (PCI) was consistently shown to be superior to thrombolysis regardless of the duration of symptoms. Recent studies further suggest that it may be preferable for small hospitals to rapidly transfer patients with acute STEMI to a PCI center rather than perform on-site thrombolysis. Therefore, this novel strategy is principally recommended in the updated guidelines of German and international cardiac societies. However, it is emphasized that the transfer-related delay of treatment should not exceed 60-90 minutes.

Schlüsselwörter

Myokardinfarkt - Thrombolyse - Intervention - Koronarangioplastie - Rekanalisation

Keywords

Myocardial infarction - thrombolysis - intervention - angioplasty - recanalization
 

  • References

  • 1 AIMS Trial Study Group.. Effect of intravenous APSAC on mortality after acute myocardial infarction: preliminary report of a placebo-controlled clinical trial. Lancet 1988; 1: 545-9.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Andersen HR, Nielsen TT, Rasmussen K. et al. A comparison of coronary angioplasty with fibrinolytic therapy in acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 2003; 349: 733-42.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Antman EM, Anbe DT, Armstrong PW. et al. ACC/ AHA guidelines for the management of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction--executive summary. A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to revise the 1999 guidelines for the management of patients with acute myocardial infarction). J Am Coll Cardiol 2004; 44: 671-719.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Aversano T, Aversano LT, Passamani E. et al. Thrombolytic therapy vs primary percutaneous coronary intervention for myocardial infarction in patients presenting to hospitals without on-site cardiac surgery: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2002; 287: 1943-51.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Boersma E, Maas AC, Deckers JW. et al. Early thrombolytic treatment in acute myocardial infarction: reappraisal of the golden hour. Lancet 1996; 348: 771-5.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Bonnefoy E, Lapostolle F, Leizorovicz A. et al. Primary angioplasty versus prehospital fibrinolysis in acute myocardial infarction: a randomised study. Lancet 2002; 360: 825-9.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Dalby M, Bouzamondo A, Lechat P. et al. Transfer for primary angioplasty versus immediate thrombolysis in acute myocardial infarction: a metaanalysis. Circulation 2003; 108: 1809-14.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Fibrinolytic Therapy Trialists’ (FTT) Collaborative Group.. Indications for fibrinolytic therapy in suspected acute myocardial infarction: collaborative overview of early mortality and major morbidity results from all randomised trials of more than 1000 patients. Lancet 1994; 343: 311-22.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Fox KA, Cokkinos DV, Deckers J. et al. The ENACT study: a pan-European survey of acute coronary syndromes. European Network forAcute Coronary Treatment. Eur Heart J 2000; 21: 1440-9.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Grines CL, Serruys P, O’Neill WW. Fibrinolytic therapy: is it a treatment of the past?. Circulation 2003; 107: 2538-42.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Streptochinasi nell‘Infarto Miocardico (GISSI).. Effectiveness of intravenous thrombolytic treatment in acute myocardial infarction. Lancet 1986; 1: 397-402.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Hamm CW. Leitlinien der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Kardiologie: Akutes Koronarsyndrom. Teil 2: Akutes Koronarsyndrom mit ST-Hebung. Z Kardiol 2004; 93: 324-41.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 ISIS-2 (Second International Study of Infarct Survival) Collaborative Group.. Randomised trial of intravenous streptokinase, oral aspirin, both, or neither among 17,187 cases of suspected acute myocardial infarction: ISIS-2. Lancet 1988; 2: 349-60.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 ISIS-3 (Third International Study of Infarct Survival) Collaborative Group.. ISIS-3: a randomised comparison of streptokinase vs tissue plasminogen activator vs anistreplase and of aspirin plus heparin vs aspirin alone among 41,299 cases of suspected acute myocardial infarction. Lancet 1992; 339: 753-70.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Keeley EC, Boura JA, Grines CL. Primary angioplasty versus intravenous thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction: a quantitative review of 23 randomised trials. Lancet 2003; 361: 13-20.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 LATE Study Group.. Late Assessment of Thrombolytic Efficacy (LATE) study with alteplase 6–24 hours after onset of acute myocardial infarction. Lancet 1993; 342: 759-66.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Lowel H, Meisinger C, Heier M. et al. The population- based acute myocardial infarction (AMI) registry of the MONICA/KORA study region of Augsburg. Gesundheitswesen 2005; 67 (Suppl. 01) S31-S37.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Lowel H, Meisinger C, Heier M. et al. Sex specific trends of sudden cardiac death and acute myocardial infarction: results of the population-based KORA/MONICA-Augsburg register 1985 to 1998. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 2002; 127: 2311-6.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Lundergan CF, Reiner JS, Ross AM. How long is too long? Association of time delay to successful reperfusion and ventricular function outcome in acute myocardial infarction: the case for thrombolytic therapy before planned angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction. Am Heart J 2002; 144: 456-62.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Magid DJ, Calonge BN, Rumsfeld JS. et al. Relation between hospital primary angioplasty volume and mortality for patients with acute MI treated with primary angioplasty vs thrombolytic therapy. JAMA 2000; 284: 3131-8.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Morrison LJ, Verbeek PR, McDonald AC. et al. Mortality and prehospital thrombolysis for acute myocardial infarction: A meta-analysis. JAMA 2000; 283: 2686-92.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Nallamothu BK, Bates ER. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus fibrinolytic therapy in acute myocardial infarction: is timing (almost) everything?. Am J Cardiol 2003; 92: 824-6.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Rentrop P, Blanke H, Wiegand V. et al. Recanalization by catheter of the occluded artery after acute myocardial infarction (transluminal recanalization. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 1979; 104: 1401-5.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Schömig A, Kastrati A, Dirschinger J. et al. Coronary stenting plus platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa blockade compared with tissue plasminogen activator in acute myocardial infarction. Stent versus Thrombolysis for Occluded Coronary Arteries in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction Study Investigators. N Engl J Med 2000; 343: 385-91.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 The European Myocardial Infarction Project Group.. Prehospital thrombolytic therapy in patients with suspected acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1993; 329: 383-9.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 The GUSTO Angiographic Investigators.. The effects of tissue plasminogen activator, streptokinase, or both on coronary-artery patency, ventricular function, and survival after acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1993; 329: 1615-22.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 The I. S.A.M. Study Group.. A prospective trial of intravenous streptokinase in acute myocardial infarction (I. S. A. M.). Mortality, morbidity, and infarct size at 21 days. N Engl J Med 1986; 314: 1465-71.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Tunstall-Pedoe H, Kuulasmaa K, Mahonen M. et al. Contribution of trends in survival and coronary- event rates to changes in coronary heart disease mortality: 10-year results from 37 WHO MONICA project populations. Monitoring trends and determinants in cardiovascular disease. Lancet 1999; 353: 1547-57.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Wallentin L, Goldstein P, Armstrong PW. et al. Efficacy and safety of tenecteplase in combination with the low-molecular-weight heparin enoxaparin or unfractionated heparin in the prehospital setting: the Assessment of the Safety and Efficacy of a New Thrombolytic Regimen (ASSENT)-3 PLUS randomized trial in acute myocardial infarction. Circulation 2003; 108: 135-42.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Weaver WD. All hospitals are not equal for treatment of patients with acute myocardial infarction. Circulation 2003; 108: 1768-71.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Widimsky P, Budesinsky T, Vorac D. et al. Long distance transport for primary angioplasty vs immediate thrombolysis in acute myocardial infarction. Final results of the randomized national multicentre trial--PRAGUE-2. Eur Heart J 2003; 24: 94-104.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Wilcox RG, von der LG, Olsson CG. et al. Trial of tissue plasminogen activator for mortality reduction in acute myocardial infarction. Anglo-Scandinavian Study of Early Thrombolysis (ASSET). Lancet 1988; 2: 525-30.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Zijlstra F, Hoorntje JC, de Boer MJ. et al. Longterm benefit of primary angioplasty as compared with thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1999; 341: 1413-9.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar