The exclusion of the elderly and women from clinical trials in acute myocardial infarction.

OBJECTIVE--To determine the extent to which the elderly have been excluded from trials of drug therapies used in the treatment of acute myocardial infarction, to identify factors associated with such exclusions, and to explore the relationship between the exclusion of elderly and the representation of women. DATA SOURCES--We conducted a systematic search of the English-language literature from January 1960 through September 1991 to identify all relevant studies of specific pharmacotherapies employed in the treatment of acute myocardial infarction. To accomplish this, we searched MEDLINE, major cardiology textbooks, meta-analyses, reviews, editorials, and the bibliographies of all identified articles. STUDY SELECTION--Only trials in which patients were randomly allocated to receive a specific therapeutic regimen or a placebo or nonplacebo control regimen were included for review. DATA EXTRACTION--Studies were abstracted for year of publication, source of support, performance location, drug therapies to which patients were randomized, use of invasive diagnostic tests or therapeutic procedures, exclusion criteria, size and demographic characteristics of the randomized study population, and principal outcome measures. DATA SYNTHESIS--A total of 214 trials met inclusion criteria, involving 150,920 study subjects. Over 60% of trials excluded persons over the age of 75 years. Studies published after 1980 were more likely to have age-based exclusions compared with studies published before 1980 (adjusted odds ratio, 4.92; 95% confidence interval, 2.33 to 10.54). Trials of thrombolytic therapy involving an invasive procedure were more likely to exclude elderly patients compared with other studies (adjusted odds ratio, 2.45; 95% confidence interval, 1.10 to 5.47). Studies with age-based exclusions had a smaller percentage of women compared with those without such exclusions (18% vs 23%; P = .0002), with the mean age of the study population significantly associated with the proportion of women participants (P = .0001, R2 = .29). CONCLUSIONS--Age-based exclusions are frequently used in clinical trials of medications used in the treatment of acute myocardial infarction. Such exclusions limit the ability to generalize study findings to the patient population that experiences the most morbidity and mortality from acute myocardial infarction.     

社区健康宣教对急性心肌梗死溶栓比率的影响

目的:探讨社区健康宣教急性心肌梗死(AMI)溶栓比率的影响。方法:通过回顾近三年东直门医院心内科AMI病人的收治率及溶栓率,统计AMI病人从发病到进入心内科监护病房(CCU)给药前的时间。通过对社区病人进行一年的健康宣教,提高病人对胸痛及相关症状的重视程度,对社区医生进行培训,提高其对AMI病人的溶栓的时间意识,尽可能缩短病人住院的中间环节,统计病人从发病到进入CCU的时间和东直门医院AMI一年内的收治率及溶栓率,与前三年进行比较并进行统计学分析。结果:对社区病人进行一年的健康宣教以后,病人从发病到进入CCU时间明显缩短,AMI病人的溶栓比率明显提高。与前三年的平均值比较有统计学差异。结论:社区健康宣教,提高病人对胸痛及相关症状的重视程度,可提高AMI溶栓比率,对挽救AMI病人的心肌有重要意义。     

Recommendations for ensuring early thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction. The Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada, the Canadian Cardiovascular Society and the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians for the Emergency Cardiac Care Coalition.

OBJECTIVE: To recommend practical steps to ensure early thrombolytic therapy and thereby reduce mortality and morbidity associated with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). OPTIONS: Various factors were considered that influence time to thrombolysis related to patients, independent practitioners and health care systems. OUTCOMES: Reduction in morbidity and mortality associated with AMI. EVIDENCE: Early initiation of thrombolytic therapy reduces morbidity and mortality associated with AMI. The ECC Coalition analysed the factors that might impede early implementation of thrombolytic therapy. VALUES: Published data were reviewed, and recommendations were based on consensus opinion of the Emergency Cardiac Care (ECC) Coalition. The ECC Coalition comprises 20 professional, nongovernment and government organizations and has a mandate to improve emergency cardiac care services through collaboration. BENEFITS, HARMS AND COSTS: Early thrombolytic therapy reduces morbidity and mortality associated with AMI. Implementation of the recommendations will result in reduced time to thrombolytic therapy, streamlining of current practices and enhanced cooperation among health care professionals to expedite care. Depending on existing practices, implementation may require protocol development, and public and professional education. Although costs are associated with educating the public and health care professionals, they are outweighed by the financial and social benefits of reduced morbidity and mortality. RECOMMENDATIONS: Early recognition of AMI symptoms by the public and health care professionals, early access to the emergency medical services system and early action by emergency care providers in administering thrombolytic therapy (within 30 minutes after the patient's arrival at the emergency department). VALIDATION: No similar consensus statements or practice guidelines for thrombolytic therapy in Canada are available for comparison.     

Thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction in the 1990s.

The efficacy of intravenous thrombolytic agents in preserving left ventricular function and in decreasing mortality from an acute myocardial infarction was demonstrated in the 1980s. The 1990s will concentrate on adjunctive therapy to thrombolysis in the treatment of an acute myocardial infarction.     

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

CONTEXT: Early administration of thrombolysis for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) may improve survival if safely and appropriately delivered. No systematic reviews that have comprehensively examined this topic exist in the literature. OBJECTIVE: To perform a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of prehospital vs in-hospital thrombolysis for AMI measuring in-hospital mortality. DATA SOURCES: The Cochrane search strategy was used to search MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Science Citation Index (1982-1999); Dissertation Abstracts (1987-1999); and Current Contents (1994-1999) for the terms thrombolysis, thrombolysis therapy, prehospital, and acute myocardial infarction. In addition, text and journal article bibliographies were hand searched, the National Institutes of Health Web site was reviewed, and primary authors and thrombolytic drug manufacturers were contacted for unpublished studies. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials of prehospital vs in-hospital thrombolysis for AMI measuring all-cause hospital mortality were included. Two authors independently reviewed 175 citations by title, abstract, or complete article. After exclusion of 30 duplicate citations, 145 studies remained, of which 6 studies and 3 follow-up studies met the inclusion criteria. DATA EXTRACTION: Independent data abstraction by 2 reviewers blinded to the journal, title, and author was confirmed by consensus. Trial quality was independently assessed by 2 other coauthors, blinded to the author, title, journal, introduction, and discussion. DATA SYNTHESIS: The results of the 6 randomized trials (n=6434) were pooled and indicated significantly decreased all-cause hospital mortality among patients treated with prehospital thrombolysis compared with in-hospital thrombolysis (odds ratio, 0.83; 95% confidence interval, 0.70-0.98). Results were similar regardless of trial quality or training and experience of the provider. Estimated (SE) time to thrombolysis was 104 (7) minutes for the prehospital group and 162 (16) minutes for the in-hospital thrombolysis group (P=.007). CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis suggests that prehospital thrombolysis for AMI significantly decreases the time to thrombolysis and all-cause hospital mortality. JAMA. 2000;283:2686-2692.     

Use of thrombolysis for acute myocardial infarction by general practitioners.

The early administration of thrombolytic agents significantly reduces mortality following a myocardial infarct and ideally they could be given by general practitioners when the patient is first seen. However, the diagnosis of myocardial infarction in the early stages can be very difficult especially if an electrocardiogram is not available. This may limit the use of thrombolytic drugs by general practitioners. We assessed the accuracy of diagnosis in general practice by asking general practitioners referring patients with chest pain, the likelihood that the event was due to a myocardial infarction and if they would use thrombolysis if it were available. Diagnostic accuracy and appropriate use of thrombolysis was analysed retrospectively, comparing the general practitioner with the admitting hospital doctor. One hundred consecutive patients were studied. The general practitioners accurately diagnosed myocardial infarctions in approximately 45% of cases and would have given thrombolysis inappropriately on 67% of occasions mainly because the final diagnosis in most of these patients was unstable angina rather than infarction. The hospital doctors administered streptokinase inappropriately to 33% of the patients and four had complications during treatment. Of those patients receiving thrombolysis, the average time delay from the general practitioner referring the patient to hospital to the patient being treated was 107 minutes. This study confirms that the diagnosis of myocardial infarction in the early stages is difficult and that thrombolytic therapy may be given inappropriately (mainly to patients with unstable angina). We conclude that until the accuracy of diagnosis of myocardial infarction can be improved in general practice it would seem inappropriate for thrombolysis to be given in the community at the moment.     

Diffuse alveolar hemorrhages and hemorrhagic pleural effusion after thrombolytic therapy with streptokinase for acute myocardial infarction

Thrombolytic therapy with streptokinase is commonly used in acute myocardial infarction and has markedly reduced morbidity and mortality from this condition. However, it can cause various hemorrhagic and immunological complications. We report a patient who developed diffuse pulmonary hemorrhages and bilateral hemorrhagic pleural effusion after thrombolytic therapy with streptokinase for acute myocardial infarction. This was recognized by a drop of hematocrit, pulmonary infiltrates, hemorrhagic pleural effusion and hypoxemia. The diagnosis was confirmed by demonstration of iron-laden macrophages (siderophages) in bronchoalveolar lavage. The patient required mechanical ventilation and recovered successfully. This combination of pulmonary hemorrhages and hemorrhagic pleural effusion following streptokinase therapy is extremely unusual and has not been reported previously.     

60例右心室心肌梗死的诊治分析

目的探讨右心室急性心肌梗死的病情诊断及治疗效果。方法选择急诊内科收治的急性右心室心肌梗死的患者60例,其中6例行保守治疗的方式,13例给予溶栓治疗,41例行介入治疗;对患者性别、年龄、糖尿病、抽烟、高血压等危险因素与住院的死亡率及不良心血管事件发生率之间的关系采用多因素回归模型进行回归分析。结果 6例保守治疗的患者中死亡1例。13例行溶栓方法治疗的患者发生心绞痛7例,11例临床判定再通,死亡2例;41例行介入治疗的患者均获得成功,无一例死亡。应用多因素回归对高危因素与住院期间死亡和不良心血管事件的发生率进行分析。结论急性右心室心肌梗死具有较高的死亡率和不良事件发生率,患者性别、年龄、心脏功能及严重的血管病变都是对其影响的重要因素,早期及时诊断,选用合理治疗方案是抢救成功的关键,采取介入治疗可使右室心肌梗死降低,尤其是治疗合并心源性休克或低血压的患者均比保守治疗和溶栓治疗死亡率低。     

Thrombolysis in Acute Cerebrovascular Disease

Large-scale trials have shown that thrombolytic therapy reduces mortality and preserves left ventricular function in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). That's a rationale for the use of thrombolytic agents in the management of ischemic stroke.     

'Rescue' after failed thrombolysis for acute myocardial infarction.

Prompt restoration of coronary artery patency in acute myocardial infarction is associated with substantial improvements in morbidity and mortality. The pivotal role of thrombolysis and aspirin in achieving these goals is well established. However, despite the success of thrombolytic therapy in large trials, clinical assessment in individual patients often suggests that reperfusion has not occurred after initial therapy. This review considers the validity of such bedside predictions and discusses whether such patients should be managed differently.     

急性心肌梗死早期溶栓57例临床观察

目的：观察急性心肌梗死（AMI）早期溶栓的效果。方法：收集2002年1月～2008年12月对57例急性心肌梗死早期溶栓的效果进行回顾分析。结果：治疗组和对照组血管再通率比较,有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。结论：急性心肌梗死早期溶栓能提高血管再通率,降低死亡率,改善左室重构。     

Selection bias in the use of thrombolytic therapy in acute myocardial infarction. The SAVE Investigators

OBJECTIVE. To determine whether clinical selection for thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction results in a skewed population for subsequent adverse cardiovascular events. DESIGN. A comparison of the clinical features of the patients in the Survival and Ventricular Enlargement Study who either had or had not received thrombolytic therapy was conducted in both univariate and multiple logistic regression analyses. SETTING. Hospitalized patients experiencing acute myocardial infarction from 112 broadly representative, private, academic, and government hospitals in the United States and Canada. PATIENTS. All patients in the Survival and Ventricular Enlargement Study had had a recent myocardial infarction (less than 16 days) and had a left ventricular ejection fraction of 40% or less. INTERVENTION. Thrombolytic therapy was administered to 733 patients and was not given to 1498. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES. The comparisons with respect to use of thrombolytic therapy were formulated after the completion of enrollment and indicated that the majority of patients did not receive thrombolytic therapy. RESULTS. The 1498 (67.1%) patients who did not receive thrombolytic therapy were at higher risk (older age, lower functional capacity, greater likelihood of a history of prior myocardial infarction, angina, diabetes, and hypertension) for subsequent cardiovascular events and, as anticipated, were more likely to have concomitant gastrointestinal and neurological diseases. A multiple logistic regression analysis indicated that older age, prior myocardial infarction, impaired functional status, employment status, diabetes, and neurological diseases were predictors of use of thrombolytic therapy. CONCLUSION. Although the Survival and Ventricular Enlargement Study population was selected for left ventricular dysfunction, the majority of patients who currently are judged clinically as unsuitable for thrombolytic therapy have a higher risk for adverse cardiovascular events.     

急性心肌梗塞经静脉溶栓前后QT离散度改变

目的：探讨性心肌梗塞患者静脉溶栓前后ＱＴ离散度对预后的影响。方法：对３８例急性心肌梗塞患者经静脉溶栓前后ＱＴ离散度分析,测定其经静脉溶栓前后体表导联心电图ＱＴｄ及ＱＴｃｄ。结果：溶栓成功后表现出ＱＴｄ及ＱＴｃｄ均有明显减小（Ｐ〈０．０１）。结论急性心肌梗塞患者ＱＴｄ及ＱＴｃｄ明显增大,并在溶栓成功后降低。     

瑞替普酶治疗急性心肌梗死的有效性与安全性探讨

目的:分析瑞替普酶治疗急性心肌梗死的有效性与安全性。方法:将北京市丰台区南苑医院2012年5月至2013年4月收治的60例急性心肌梗死患者分为观察组(n=30)和对照组(n=30),观察组采用瑞替普酶进行溶栓治疗,对照组采用尿激酶进行溶栓治疗。结果:观察组的冠状动脉再通率、再通时间、死亡率、并发症发生率均显著优于对照组(P<0.05),但两组患者的K-MB峰值时间和CK峰值时间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:瑞替普酶治疗急性心肌梗死疗效确切,安全性好,值得临床推广应用。     

静脉溶栓治疗急性心肌梗死临床研究

目的:探讨静脉溶栓治疗急性ST段抬高型心肌梗死(NSEMI)的疗效性。方法:急性心肌梗死患者92例根据发病至溶栓治疗时间,分为两组:发病6 h内接受溶栓治疗者为A组,6~12 h为B组。比较6 h溶栓时间窗内与6~12 h溶栓再通率的差别。结果:两组临床再通率分别为80.4%和30.9%,择期(1~2周后)冠状动脉造影(CAG)进一步证实溶栓的效果。两组相比差异有统计学意义(P(0.01)。结论:对NSEMI患者,若医院不能开展急诊经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI),应及早进行溶栓治疗,提高冠状动脉再通率,减少左心室重构,保护心功能,降低AMI的近、远期病死率。     

尿激酶早期静脉溶栓治疗急性心肌梗死疗效分析

目的探讨尿激酶静脉溶栓治疗急性心肌梗死的疗效。方法在心电图监测下，对34例急性心肌梗死患者行尿激酶静脉溶栓治疗，比较不同时段溶栓的血管再通情况、病死率及并发症。结果冠脉再通22例，再通率达64．7％；未再通12例，其中死亡2例，病死率为16．7％。不同时段溶栓时其并发症发生率明显不同（P〈0．005）。结论早期溶栓治疗可减少并发症，降低病死率。     

链激酶静脉溶栓治疗早期急性心肌梗死疗效分析

目的: 探讨链激酶静脉溶栓治疗急性心肌梗死的疗效。方法: 在心电图监测下,对34例急性心肌梗死患者行链激酶静脉溶栓治疗。结果: 冠脉再通22例,再通率达64.7%;未再通12例,其中病死2例,病死率为16.7%。不同时段溶栓时其并发症发生率明显不同(P<0.005)。结论: 早期溶栓治疗可减少并发症,降低病死率。除1例高龄患者消化道出血外,未见其他严重不良反应。     

急性心肌梗死患者溶栓治疗的护理

目的：总结心肌梗死溶栓治疗的护理经验。方法：对20例使用尿激酶溶栓治疗的急性心肌梗死患者进行护理。结果：20例急性心肌梗死患者成功救治19例,死亡1例。结论：对急性心肌梗死患者进行溶栓治疗并配合悉心的护理,有助于取得令人满意的效果。     

急性心肌梗死紧急处理措施探讨

目的：采取不同的急救措施，探索心肌梗死的治疗效果。方法：将126例患者分成非溶栓治疗组（37例）、6h以内溶栓治疗组（49例）、6h以后溶栓治疗组（40例）。治疗后进行各组冠状动脉再通、心脏事件和并发症的比较。结果：溶栓治疗和非溶栓治疗组，冠状动脉再通、心脏事件及并发症的比较P＜0．01、P＜0．05。6h以内溶栓治疗组和6h以后溶栓治疗组，冠状动脉再通，心脏事件及并发症的比较P＜0．05，P＞0．05。结论：急性心肌梗死早期采取溶栓治疗效果比较理想，而溶栓治疗的时间窗并不一定限制在6h以内。对身体状况好，又适当溶栓治疗的患者，仍以积极溶栓治疗为原则，但高龄患者溶栓治疗应持谨慎态度。     

心肺复苏过程中静脉溶栓救治急性心肌梗死临床分析

目的:总结心肺复苏过程中加用尿激酶溶栓救治急性心肌梗死患者的临床效果。方法:对在我院急诊科及ICU病房中发生心跳骤停的6例心梗患者,在心肺复苏过程中加用尿激酶溶栓治疗。结果:6例患者中5例复苏后存活(包括1例脑死亡病例),1例抢救无效于急诊室死亡。结论:对急性心肌梗死并发心跳骤停的患者,在心肺复苏过程中,应积极尽快溶栓治疗,而不应等待自主心跳恢复后再溶栓,以争取时间,最大限度地提高抢救成功率。