A comparison of rescue and primary percutaneous coronary interventions for acute myocardial infarction: a multicenter registry report of 9,371 patients

To perform a comparative analysis of in-hospital results obtained from AMI patients who underwent rescue or primary PTCA. From the Brazilian Interventional National Registry (CENIC), we selected all consecutive patients who underwent a percutaneous coronary intervention for myocardial infarction (&l...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia 2004-05, Vol.82 (5), p.440
Main Authors: Mattos, Luiz Alberto, Sousa, Amanda G M R, Pinto, Ibraim M F, Silva, Expedito R, Carneiro, José Klauber, Sousa, J Eduardo, Mangione, José Armando, Caramori, Paulo, Lima, Valter, Bueno, Ronaldo L
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Aged
Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronary - mortality
Brazil - epidemiology
Epidemiologic Methods
Female
Fibrinolytic Agents - therapeutic use
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Myocardial Infarction - mortality
Myocardial Infarction - therapy
Myocardial Reperfusion
Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors - therapeutic use
Salvage Therapy - methods
Stents
Treatment Outcome
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:To perform a comparative analysis of in-hospital results obtained from AMI patients who underwent rescue or primary PTCA. From the Brazilian Interventional National Registry (CENIC), we selected all consecutive patients who underwent a percutaneous coronary intervention for myocardial infarction (< 24 hours), between 1997 and 2000, analyzing those undergoing a rescue (n=840) or a primary (n=8,531) procedure, and comparing their in-hospital results. Rescue patients were significantly younger males with anterior wall infarctions, associated with left ventricular dysfunction, but had less multivessel disease, compared with those treated with primary intervention. Coronary stents were implanted in at similar rates (56.9% vs. 54.9%; P=0.283). Procedural success were lower for rescue cases (88.1% vs. 91.2%; P
ISSN:0066-782X