You are in:Home/Publications/Primary PCI versus Pharmaco-Invasive Strategy in Patients with ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction; a Randomized Clinical Study

Prof. Mohamed Abdou Mohamed Salem :: Publications:

Title:
Primary PCI versus Pharmaco-Invasive Strategy in Patients with ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction; a Randomized Clinical Study
Authors: Ahmed Bendary*, Wael Tawfek, Mohammed Mahros, Mohamed Salem
Year: 2018
Keywords: Fibrinolysis, PCI, Reperfusion, STEMI
Journal: J Cardiovasc Disease Res., 2018; 9(1):28-31.
Volume: 9
Issue: 1
Pages: 28-31.
Publisher: Not Available
Local/International: International
Paper Link: Not Available
Full paper Mohamed Abdou Mohamed Salem_PPCI vs PI.pdf
Supplementary materials Not Available
Abstract:

Background: It is debatable whether immediate fibrinolysis followed by timely coronary angiography, provides a clinical outcome similar to that with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) early after acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Methods: During period from December 2016 to June 2017, 60 patients with STEMI were randomly assigned to undergo either primary PCI (Group I) or immediate fibrinolysis (Group II) with subsequent coronary angiography with PCI within 3 to 24 hr later. The primary end point was a composite of all-cause death, re-infarction, and target-vessel revascularization, re-hospitalization for cardiac reasons, any stroke and major bleeding up to 30 days. Results: The primary endpoint was reported in 23% of patient who had PPCI versus 33% in those who had pharmacoinvasive strategy (RR= 0.7, 95% CI 0.31-1.58, P= 0.46). Delay time from symptom onset to each of the two reperfusion strategies was shorter in group II than group I (110 ± 27.5 versus 186.8 ± 16.6 mins respectively, P

Google ScholarAcdemia.eduResearch GateLinkedinFacebookTwitterGoogle PlusYoutubeWordpressInstagramMendeleyZoteroEvernoteORCIDScopus