Literature DB >> 12355031

Feasibility and timing of prehospital administration of reteplase in patients with acute myocardial infarction.

Donald G Rosenberg1, Esther Levin, Ana Lausell, Allen Brown, John Gardner, Esther Perez, Mark Veenendaal, Yee S C Ong, Mary Gunn.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In myocardial infarction patients undergoing thrombolysis, treatment delays negatively impact outcomes. This pilot study was conducted to determine the feasibility and timing of field administration of intravenous double bolus reteplase in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction.
METHODS: Sixty three patients with symptoms and EKG changes consistent with acute myocardial infarction of less than six hours duration received the first bolus of reteplase before arriving at the emergency department. A second bolus of reteplase was given in the emergency department. Subsequent resolution of ST-segment elevation was measured. Mean time from symptom onset to paramedic dispatch, and paramedic arrivals to first bolus of reteplase were measured. The mean time from the first bolus of reteplase to heparin bolus in an emergency department was also measured. All patients with evidence of ST-elevation and suspected acute myocardial infarction gave consent for the thrombolytic therapy. There were no refusals of therapy among those candidates eligible for thrombolysis.
RESULTS: The mean times from the first bolus of reteplase to heparin bolus in the emergency department was substantially longer than the in-field times. Resolution of ST-segment elevation was recorded in 52 of the 63 patients and the times of resolution ranged from five minutes after the first bolus dose to 190 minutes after the second bolus of reteplase. Resolution of ST-segment elevation and relief of pain occurred almost simultaneously.
CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrated that in-field administration of thrombolytic therapy is a viable option to reduce the delay from symptom onset to initiation of thrombolysis. They demonstrated that satisfactory resolution of ST-segment elevation can be recorded in the field. The reduction in mortality observed in this study is comparable to previously published studies on inpatients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12355031     DOI: 10.1023/a:1020474822885

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis        ISSN: 0929-5305            Impact factor:   2.300


  21 in total

1.  Mortality and prehospital thrombolysis for acute myocardial infarction: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  L J Morrison; P R Verbeek; A C McDonald; B V Sawadsky; D J Cook
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2000 May 24-31       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  A comparison of reteplase with alteplase for acute myocardial infarction.

Authors: 
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1997-10-16       Impact factor: 91.245

3.  Prehospital delay in patients hospitalized with heart attack symptoms in the United States: the REACT trial. Rapid Early Action for Coronary Treatment (REACT) Study Group.

Authors:  D C Goff; H A Feldman; P G McGovern; R J Goldberg; D G Simons-Morton; C E Cornell; S K Osganian; L S Cooper; J R Hedges
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 4.749

4.  Prehospital thrombolytic therapy in patients with suspected acute myocardial infarction.

Authors: 
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1993-08-05       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  Prehospital thrombolysis in acute myocardial infarction.

Authors:  J Schofer; J Büttner; G Geng; K Gutschmidt; H N Herden; D G Mathey; H P Moecke; P Polster; A Raftopoulo; F H Sheehan
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  1990-12-15       Impact factor: 2.778

Review 6.  Molecular biology of plasminogen activators: what are the clinical implications of drug design?

Authors:  R W Smalling
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  1996-12-19       Impact factor: 2.778

7.  Effectiveness of intravenous thrombolytic treatment in acute myocardial infarction. Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Streptochinasi nell'Infarto Miocardico (GISSI).

Authors: 
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1986-02-22       Impact factor: 79.321

8.  Prehospital-initiated vs hospital-initiated thrombolytic therapy. The Myocardial Infarction Triage and Intervention Trial.

Authors:  W D Weaver; M Cerqueira; A P Hallstrom; P E Litwin; J S Martin; P J Kudenchuk; M Eisenberg
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1993-09-08       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  Influence of time to treatment on early infarct-related artery patency after different thrombolytic regimens. ALKK-Study Group.

Authors:  U Zeymer; U Tebbe; R v Essen; W Haarmann; K L Neuhaus
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 4.749

10.  Hospital delays and problems with thrombolytic administration in patients receiving thrombolytic therapy: a multicenter prospective assessment. Virginia Thrombolytic Study Group.

Authors:  E R Gonzalez; L A Jones; J P Ornato; G C Bleecker; M J Strauss
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  1992-10       Impact factor: 5.721

View more
  3 in total

Review 1.  Pre-hospital versus in-hospital thrombolysis for ST-elevation myocardial infarction.

Authors:  Michael McCaul; Andrit Lourens; Tamara Kredo
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2014-09-10

2.  Simultaneous ring voice-over-Internet phone system enables rapid physician elicitation of explicit informed consent in prehospital stroke treatment trials.

Authors:  Nerses Sanossian; Sidney Starkman; David S Liebeskind; Latisha K Ali; Lucas Restrepo; Scott Hamilton; Robin Conwit; Jeffrey L Saver
Journal:  Cerebrovasc Dis       Date:  2009-10-16       Impact factor: 2.762

3.  Comparison of urokinase and reteplase thrombolytic treatment in patients with high-risk pulmonary embolism.

Authors:  Yi Zhang; Lan Ma; Qi Fu; Tao Zhao; Rui-Ying Yan; Xing Su
Journal:  Exp Ther Med       Date:  2019-10-31       Impact factor: 2.447

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.