Has thrombolytic therapy changed the equation for postinfarction risk stratification?

Aurigemma, Gerard P.

doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(05)62820-6

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, most studies were made in the prethrombolytic era or comprised mixed patient groups making it difficult to apply the findings on thrombolysed patients. In fact, the prognostic value of exercise testing and estimation of left ventricular function after thrombolytic therapy has been questioned [10–12]. Cardiac events are most likely to occur within the first months postAMI [13].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk assessment in patients with acute myocardial infarction treated with thrombolytic therapy

Jensen‐Urstad

Samad

Jensen‐Urstad

et al. 2001

Journal of Internal Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Jensen-Urstad M, Samad BA, Jensen-Urstad K, Hulting J, Ruiz H, Bouvier F, Ho Èjer J (Karolinska Hospital, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm; So Èder Hospital, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm; Karolinska Hospital, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm; and So Èder Hospital, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden). Risk assessment in patients with acute myocardial infarction treated with thrombolytic therapy. J Intern Med 2001; 249: 527±537.Objective. Several noninvasive methods have prognostic information regarding mortality and new coronary events after an acute myocardial infarction (AMI). The practical for clinical decision-making in the immediate postmyocardial infarction (MI) period is, however, less evident. We investigated consecutive patients with AMI treated with thrombolysis to further clarify this issue. Design. A total of 100 patients (27% women) aged 64 9 years (mean SD) were studied. Risk assessment based on a clinical score system, myocardial perfusion scintigraphy single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) at rest and during adenosine stress, echocardiography, radionuclide angiography, symptom-limited exercise stress test, and 24-h Holter ECG recording with ST-analysis and analysis of heart rate variability (HRV) were performed 5±8 days after hospital admission. Mortality, nonfatal reinfarction, and the need for revascularization were followed during 12 months. Setting. A university hospital. Results. A total of 6 patients died, seven had a nonfatal reinfarction, and 23 were revascularized. Inability to perform an exercise test (P 0.004) and an ejection fraction (EF) <40% (P 0.002) were the only parameters separating those who died from the survivors. No method could predict a nonfatal reinfarction. Patients suffering either death or nonfatal reinfarction had a clinical risk assessment score 2 points higher (8.8 vs. 6.7, P 0.05) than the group without such events. A positive symptomlimited exercise stress test (P 0.027), ST-depressions on Holter ECG (P 0.04), and reversibility on myocardial perfusion scintigraphy (P 0.029) predicted the need for revascularization. Conclusion. Risk assessment based on clinical information, exercise stress testing, and an estimate of left ventricular function (e.g. via echocardiography) contribute with prognostic information in thrombolysed MI-patients. Additional noninvasive investigations such as adenosine-SPECT, analysis of HRV, and Holter-monitoring do not add to these commonly available tools in risk strati®cation of subjects at low to medium risk.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%