Literature DB >> 8456754

Minimizing the risk of inappropriately administering thrombolytic therapy (Thrombolysis and Angioplasty in Myocardial Infarction [TAMI] study group).

G D Chapman1, E M Ohman, E J Topol, R J Candela, D J Kereiakes, J Samaha, E Berrios, K S Pieper, S Y Young, R M Califf.   

Abstract

Despite the proven benefits of thrombolytic therapy in acute myocardial infarction, concern for its complications, especially in patients misdiagnosed with myocardial infarction, has led to hesitancy in its use. Historical, clinical and electrocardiographic criteria were developed for enrolling patients with suspected acute myocardial infarction into thrombolytic trials by noncardiovascular specialists. The incidence of misdiagnosis of myocardial infarction and the clinical outcomes when these criteria were used were evaluated for 1,387 consecutive patients given thrombolytic therapy. Twenty-five community hospitals and 7 interventional centers were the sites of enrollment. Most patients (63%) were enrolled from community hospitals. Criteria for thrombolytic therapy included: symptoms of acute myocardial infarction < 6 hours but > 20 minutes, and not relieved by nitroglycerin; and ST-segment elevation > or = 1 mm in 2 contiguous leads or ST-segment depression of posterior myocardial infarction. Exclusion criteria reflecting increased risk of bleeding were used. A final diagnosis of myocardial infarction was based on creatinine kinase-MB, electrocardiographic and ventriculographic evaluation. Acute myocardial infarction was misdiagnosed in 20 patients (1.4%; 95% confidence interval 0.8-2.0%). These patients were demographically similar to those with acute myocardial infarction. All misdiagnosed patients survived; no significant adverse events occurred. Thus, in several clinical settings, a simple algorithm with specific criteria was used for diagnosing acute myocardial infarction and administering thrombolytic therapy. The inclusion criteria used in this study led to a low rate of misdiagnosis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8456754     DOI: 10.1016/0002-9149(93)90824-v

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Cardiol        ISSN: 0002-9149            Impact factor:   2.778


  4 in total

1.  Observer variability in ECG interpretation for thrombolysis eligibility: experience and context matter.

Authors:  David Massel
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 2.300

Review 2.  Cost implications of prehospital emergency drug administration. The case of prehospital thrombolytics.

Authors:  S Barton; T Walley
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1996-11       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 3.  Criteria for drug usage review of thrombolytics in acute myocardial infarction.

Authors:  S McGlynn
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1995-01       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  Conditions mimicking acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction in patients referred for primary percutaneous coronary intervention.

Authors:  Y L Gu; T Svilaas; I C C van der Horst; F Zijlstra
Journal:  Neth Heart J       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 2.380

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.