Impact of Time to Treatment on Mortality After Prehospital Fibrinolysis or Primary Angioplasty: Data From the CAPTIM Randomized Clinical Trial

Background—CAPTIM was a randomized trial comparing prehospital thrombolysis with transfer to an interventional facility (and, if needed, percutaneous intervention) with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Because the benefit of thrombolysis is maximal during the first 2 hours after symptom onset, and because prehospital thrombolysis can be implemented earlier than PCI, this analysis studied the relationship between the effect of assigned treatment and the time elapsed from symptom onset. Methods and Results—Randomization within 2 hours (n=460) or ≥2 hours (n=374) after symptom onset had no impact on the effect of treatment on the 30-day combined primary end point of death, nonfatal reinfarction, and disabling stroke. However, patients randomized <2 hours after symptom onset had a strong trend toward lower 30-day mortality with prehospital thrombolysis compared with those randomized to primary PCI (2.2% versus 5.7%, P =0.058), whereas mortality was similar in patients randomized ≥2 hours (5.9% versus 3.7%, P =0.47). There was a significant interaction between treatment effect and delay with respect to 30-day mortality (hazard ratio 4.19, 95% CI 1.033 to 17.004, P =0.045). Among patients randomized in the first 2 hours, cardiogenic shock was less frequent with lytic therapy than with primary PCI (1.3% versus 5.3%, P =0.032), whereas rates were similar in patients randomized later. Conclusions—Time from symptom onset should be considered when one selects reperfusion therapy in STEMI. Prehospital thrombolysis may be preferable to primary PCI for patients treated within the first 2 hours after symptom onset.

[1]  G. Levine,et al.  Thrombolysis in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock , 2005, Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis.

[2]  R. Manfredini,et al.  Impact of time to treatment on mortality after prehospital fibrinolysis or primary angioplasty. , 2004, Circulation.

[3]  Klaus Rasmussen,et al.  A comparison of coronary angioplasty with fibrinolytic therapy in acute myocardial infarction. , 2003, The New England journal of medicine.

[4]  J. Henriques,et al.  Outcome of primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction during routine duty hours versus during off-hours. , 2003, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[5]  P. Serruys,et al.  Fibrinolytic therapy: is it a treatment of the past? , 2003, Circulation.

[6]  J. Boura,et al.  Primary angioplasty versus intravenous thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction : a quantitative review of 23 randomised trials , 2022 .

[7]  M. Aschermann,et al.  Long distance transport for primary angioplasty vs immediate thrombolysis in acute myocardial infarction. Final results of the randomized national multicentre trial--PRAGUE-2. , 2003, European heart journal.

[8]  F. Zijlstra Angioplasty vs thrombolysis for acute myocardial infarction: a quantitative overview of the effects of interhospital transportation. , 2003, European heart journal.

[9]  P. Touboul,et al.  Primary angioplasty versus prehospital fibrinolysis in acute myocardial infarction: a randomised study , 2002, The Lancet.

[10]  J. Reiner,et al.  How long is too long? Association of time delay to successful reperfusion and ventricular function outcome in acute myocardial infarction: the case for thrombolytic therapy before planned angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction. , 2002, American heart journal.

[11]  R. Gibbons,et al.  Clinical characteristics and outcome of patients with early (<2 h), intermediate (2-4 h) and late (>4 h) presentation treated by primary coronary angioplasty or thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction. , 2002, European heart journal.

[12]  William W O'Neill,et al.  A randomized trial of transfer for primary angioplasty versus on-site thrombolysis in patients with high-risk myocardial infarction: the Air Primary Angioplasty in Myocardial Infarction study. , 2002, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[13]  Thrombolytic therapy vs primary percutaneous coronary intervention for myocardial infarction in patients presenting to hospitals without on-site cardiac surgery: a randomized controlled trial. , 2002, JAMA.

[14]  R. Gibbons,et al.  Clinical characteristics and outcome of patients with early ( 4 h) presentation treated by primary coronary angioplasty or thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction. , 2002 .

[15]  Á. Avezum,et al.  Practice variation and missed opportunities for reperfusion in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction: findings from the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) , 2002, The Lancet.

[16]  E. Antman,et al.  Early coronary intervention following pharmacologic therapy for acute myocardial infarction (the combined TIMI 10B-TIMI 14 experience). , 2001, The American journal of cardiology.

[17]  C M Gibson,et al.  Relationship of symptom-onset-to-balloon time and door-to-balloon time with mortality in patients undergoing angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction. , 2000, JAMA.

[18]  L. Morrison,et al.  Mortality and prehospital thrombolysis for acute myocardial infarction: A meta-analysis. , 2000, JAMA.

[19]  H. Suryapranata,et al.  Multicentre randomized trial comparing transport to primary angioplasty vs immediate thrombolysis vs combined strategy for patients with acute myocardial infarction presenting to a community hospital without a catheterization laboratory. The PRAGUE study. , 2000, European heart journal.

[20]  S. Greenhouse,et al.  A randomized trial comparing primary angioplasty with a strategy of short-acting thrombolysis and immediate planned rescue angioplasty in acute myocardial infarction: the PACT trial , 1999 .

[21]  H. White,et al.  Early revascularization in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. SHOCK Investigators. Should We Emergently Revascularize Occluded Coronaries for Cardiogenic Shock. , 1999, The New England journal of medicine.

[22]  R. Califf,et al.  Relationship between delay in performing direct coronary angioplasty and early clinical outcome in patients with acute myocardial infarction: results from the global use of strategies to open occluded arteries in Acute Coronary Syndromes (GUSTO-IIb) trial. , 1999, Circulation.

[23]  J. Golmard,et al.  A matched comparison of the combination of prehospital thrombolysis and standby rescue angioplasty with primary angioplasty. , 1999, The American journal of cardiology.

[24]  R. Califf,et al.  Frequency and clinical outcome of cardiogenic shock during acute myocardial infarction among patients receiving reteplase or alteplase Results from GUSTO-III , 1999 .

[25]  R. Califf,et al.  Frequency and clinical outcome of cardiogenic shock during acute myocardial infarction among patients receiving reteplase or alteplase. Results from GUSTO-III. Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Coronary Arteries. , 1999, European heart journal.

[26]  F. Portaluppi,et al.  From a static to a dynamic concept of risk: the circadian epidemiology of cardiovascular events. , 1999, Chronobiology international.

[27]  S. Greenhouse,et al.  A randomized trial comparing primary angioplasty with a strategy of short-acting thrombolysis and immediate planned rescue angioplasty in acute myocardial infarction: the PACT trial. PACT investigators. Plasminogen-activator Angioplasty Compatibility Trial. , 1999, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[28]  J. Golmard,et al.  Efficacy of streptokinase, but not tissue-type plasminogen activator, in achieving 90-minute patency after thrombolysis for acute myocardial infarction decreases with time to treatment. PERM Study Group. Prospective Evaluation of Reperfusion Markers. , 1998, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[29]  R. Gibbons,et al.  Comparison of primary coronary angioplasty and intravenous thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction: a quantitative review. , 1998, JAMA.

[30]  Eric Boersma,et al.  Early thrombolytic treatment in acute myocardial infarction: reappraisal of the golden hour , 1996, The Lancet.

[31]  P. Kurnik Circadian variation in the efficacy of tissue-type plasminogen activator. , 1995, Circulation.

[32]  C. Fry,et al.  Science of urinary incontinence Report of a Meeting of Physicians and Scientists, University College London , 1994, The Lancet.

[33]  Fibrinolytic Therapy Trialists' Collaborative Group Indications for fibrinolytic therapy in suspected acute myocardial infarction: collaborative overview of early mortality and major morbidity results from all randomised trials of more than 1000 patients , 1994, The Lancet.

[34]  Fibrinolytictherapytrialistsf Indications for fibrinolytic therapy in suspected acute myocardial infarction: collaborative overview of early mortality and major morbidity results from all randomised trials of more than 1000 patients , 1994 .

[35]  Johan Herlitz,et al.  Indications for fibrinolytic therapy in suspected acute myocardial infarction : collaborative overview of early mortality and major morbidity results from all randomised trials of more than 1000 patients , 1994 .

[36]  P. Kudenchuk,et al.  Prehospital-initiated vs hospital-initiated thrombolytic therapy. The Myocardial Infarction Triage and Intervention Trial. , 1993, JAMA.

[37]  Prehospital thrombolytic therapy in patients with suspected acute myocardial infarction. , 1993, The New England journal of medicine.

[38]  J. Boissel,et al.  Coronary Reperfusion Rates in Acute Myocardial Infarction Patients After Thrombolytic Treatment with Anistreplase: Correlation with the Delay from Onset of Symptoms to Treatment A Review of 424 Case Records of Patients Admitted to Coronary Reperfusion Studies with Anistreplase , 1992, Journal of cardiovascular pharmacology.

[39]  T. Lüscher,et al.  Endothelium‐Dependent Regulation of Resistance Arteries: Alterations with Aging and Hypertension , 1992, Journal of cardiovascular pharmacology.

[40]  Dwight E. Peake,et al.  Thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) trial: Phase I. A comparison between intravenous tissue plasminogen activator and intravenous streptokinase , 1988 .

[41]  R Roberts,et al.  Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) Trial, Phase I: A comparison between intravenous tissue plasminogen activator and intravenous streptokinase. Clinical findings through hospital discharge. , 1987, Circulation.

[42]  Harold T. Dodge,et al.  Thrombolysis inMyocardial Infarction (TIMI) Trial, Phase I:acomparison between intravenous tissue plasminogen activator andintravenous streptokinase* , 1987 .

[43]  J. Lowe,et al.  The Wavefront Phenomenon of Ischemic Cell Death: 1. Myocardial Infarct Size vs Duration of Coronary Occlusion in Dogs , 1977, Circulation.