Primary angioplasty versus intravenous thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction: a quantitative review of 23 randomised trials

[1]  T. Nielsen,et al.  Danish multicenter randomized study on fibrinolytic therapy versus acute coronary angioplasty in acute myocardial infarction: rationale and design of the DANish trial in Acute Myocardial Infarction-2 (DANAMI-2). , 2003, American heart journal.

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

[3]  M L Simoons,et al.  A prospective survey of the characteristics, treatments and outcomes of patients with acute coronary syndromes in Europe and the Mediterranean basin; the Euro Heart Survey of Acute Coronary Syndromes (Euro Heart Survey ACS). , 2002, European heart journal.

[4]  J. Ottervanger,et al.  Reperfusion therapy in elderly patients with acute myocardial infarction: a randomized comparison of primary angioplasty and thrombolytic therapy. , 2002, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[5]  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.

[6]  G. Knatterud,et al.  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.

[7]  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 .

[8]  S. Nekolla,et al.  Myocardial salvage after coronary stenting plus abciximab versus fibrinolysis plus abciximab in patients with acute myocardial infarction: a randomised trial , 2002, The Lancet.

[9]  G. Nichol,et al.  Stenting versus thrombolysis in acute myocardial infarction trial (STAT). , 2001, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[10]  H. White,et al.  One-year survival following early revascularization for cardiogenic shock. , 2001, JAMA.

[11]  J. Rumsfeld,et al.  Relation between hospital primary angioplasty volume and mortality for patients with acute MI treated with primary angioplasty vs thrombolytic therapy. , 2000, JAMA.

[12]  J. Ottervanger,et al.  Long-term benefit of primary angioplasty compared to thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction. , 2000, European heart journal.

[13]  M. Schwaiger,et al.  Coronary stenting plus platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa blockade compared with tissue plasminogen activator in acute myocardial infarction. Stent versus Thrombolysis for Occluded Coronary Arteries in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction Study Investigators. , 2000, The New England journal of medicine.

[14]  W. Rogers,et al.  The volume of primary angioplasty procedures and survival after acute myocardial infarction. National Registry of Myocardial Infarction 2 Investigators. , 2000, The New England journal of medicine.

[15]  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.

[16]  J. Ottervanger,et al.  Long-term benefit of primary angioplasty as compared with thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction. , 1999, The New England journal of medicine.

[17]  W. Dassen,et al.  Prospective randomised comparison between thrombolysis, rescue PTCA, and primary PTCA in patients with extensive myocardial infarction admitted to a hospital without PTCA facilities: a safety and feasibility study , 1999, Heart.

[18]  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.

[19]  J. López-Sendón,et al.  Primary angioplasty versus systemic thrombolysis in anterior myocardial infarction. , 1999, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[20]  J. O’Keefe,et al.  Long-term outcome after primary angioplasty: report from the primary angioplasty in myocardial infarction (PAMI-I) trial. , 1999, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[21]  A. Vado,et al.  Comparison of thrombolytic therapy and primary coronary angioplasty with liberal stenting for inferior myocardial infarction with precordial ST-segment depression: immediate and long-term results of a randomized study. , 1998, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[22]  R. Gibbons,et al.  Comparison of primary coronary angioplasty and intravenous thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction : A quantitative review , 1997 .

[23]  M. Simoons,et al.  A clinical trial comparing primary coronary angioplasty with tissue plasminogen activator for acute myocardial infarction. , 1997, The New England journal of medicine.

[24]  H. Suryapranata,et al.  Randomized comparison of primary coronary angioplasty with thrombolytic therapy in low risk patients with acute myocardial infarction. , 1997, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[25]  L. Grinfeld,et al.  Fibrinolytics vs primary angioplasty in acute myocardial infarction (FAP): A randomized trial in a community hospital in Argentina , 1996 .

[26]  A. Vado,et al.  Primary angioplasty versus thrombolysis in inferior acute myocardial infarction with anterior ST-segment depression, a single-center randomized study , 1996 .

[27]  S. Yusuf,et al.  Does PTCA in acute myocardial infarction affect mortality and reinfarction rates? A quantitative overview (meta-analysis) of the randomized clinical trials. , 1995, Circulation.

[28]  J. Ottervanger,et al.  Primary coronary angioplasty versus intravenous streptokinase in acute myocardial infarction: differences in outcome during a mean follow‐up of 18 months , 1994, Coronary artery disease.

[29]  E. Ribeiro,et al.  Randomized trial of direct coronary angioplasty versus intravenous streptokinase in acute myocardial infarction. , 1993, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[30]  J O'Keefe,et al.  A Comparison of Immediate Angioplasty with Thrombolytic Therapy for Acute Myocardial Infarction , 1993 .

[31]  K. Bailey,et al.  Immediate angioplasty compared with the administration of a thrombolytic agent followed by conservative treatment for myocardial infarction. The Mayo Coronary Care Unit and Catheterization Laboratory Groups. , 1993, The New England journal of medicine.

[32]  J. Reiber,et al.  A comparison of immediate coronary angioplasty with intravenous streptokinase in acute myocardial infarction. , 1993, The New England journal of medicine.

[33]  B. Pitt,et al.  A prospective randomized clinical trial of intracoronary streptokinase versus coronary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction. , 1986, The New England journal of medicine.

[34]  K. Karsch,et al.  Acute myocardial infarction: Intracoronary application of nitroglycerin and streptokinase , 1979, Clinical cardiology.

[35]  M. Davies,et al.  Pathology of acute myocardial infarction with particular reference to occlusive coronary thrombi. , 1976, British heart journal.

[36]  W. Weaver,et al.  Primary coronary angioplasty compared with intravenous thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction: six-month follow up and analysis of individual patient data from randomized trials. , 2003, American heart journal.

[37]  R. Collins,et al.  Selection of reperfusion therapy for individual patients with evolving myocardial infarction. , 1997, European heart journal.

[38]  Frans Van de Werf,et al.  An international randomized trial comparing four thrombolytic strategies for acute myocardial infarction. , 1993, The New England journal of medicine.