Thrombolytic and antithrombotic treatment in myocardial infarction: main achievements and future perspectives

Thrombolytic therapy: clinical applications

The therapeutic use of thrombolytic agents is the result of the increasing understanding of the pathophysiologic mechanisms underlying normal and deranged thrombosis and fibrinolysis. Plasminogen activators capable of increasing the production of plasmin exhibit considerable efficacy in the treatment of a variety of arterial and venous thrombotic disorders. The ideal thrombolytic agent has not been developed, but the desired clinical result of rapid opening of the thrombosed vessel without reocclusion, without activation of systemic fibrinogenolysis, and without a risk of hemorrhage are defined. Clinical studies clearly demonstrate that the addition of a variety of adjunctive agents to available thrombolytics enhances benefit without inordinate risk. The addition of intravascular angioplasty and stenting to thrombolysis increases the potential long-term benefit. Newer thrombolytic agents and new protocols for the use of existing therapies offer the promise of saving many who would otherwise succumb to coronary or cerebral arterial thrombosis or to venous thromboembolism.

Contribution of stenting to the results of rescue PTCA

Failed thrombolysis in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is associated with increased mortality. Controversial benefit of rescue percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) in these setting has been published. The feasibility, safety, and contribution of stenting to the outcome of AMI patients treated with this strategy is unknown. We studied the angiographic result and clinical outcome of 33 patients with failed thrombolysis referred for rescue angioplasty. Twenty-three patients had stenting and 10 patients did not have stenting. Both groups had similar clinical and angiographic characteristics. Stent indications were nonoptimal result, 40%; bailout, 40%; elective, 20%. Angiographic success was 100% with stent vs. 91% with balloon alone (P < 0.8). Postprocedure residual stenosis was 1.5% (0%-10%) with stent vs. 18.05% (0%-30%) with balloon alone (P < 0.01). Thirty-day outcome with and without stent was mortality, 0% vs. 13% (P < 1.0); reinfarction, 10% vs. 0% (P < 0.30); target vessel revascularization, 0% vs. 21% (P < 0.21). The 6-month mortality was 0% with stent vs. 14% (P < 0.5). We conclude that stenting during rescue angioplasty is feasible, safe, and is associated with better immediate angiographic results. Although no obvious clinical benefit was found, a potential decrease in the revascularization rate was suggested.

[Optimization of thrombolytic treatment in acute myocardial infarct: the role of new fibrinoselective drugs and their combination with new antithrombotics]

Although reperfusion therapy is well recognized as the mainstay of treatment of acute myocardial infarction, mortality of myocardial infarction is still high, thrombolytic treatment remains underutilized and, usually, applied too late. Additionally, most of the patients do not experience optimal reperfusion because of the suboptimal flow rate in the infarct-related artery, abnormal microvascular flow, and reocclusion of the infarct-related artery. Strategies to enhance the results of reperfusion therapy include, expanding the population of potential candidates, earlier treatment, and newer methods to improve infarct-related artery flow rates. In this sense, new thrombolytic agents, and combination therapies with or without addition of more potent and specific new antithrombotic agents are being extensively investigated. Also, it is important to promote studies of ancillary treatments to reduce reperfusion injury, which may be one cause of decreased microvascular flow. Although aspirin and heparin have been the conventionally used agents for inhibiting thrombin and platelet function, newer agents such as hirudin or hirulog and inhibitors of the platelet glycoprotein IIb-IIIa receptors are becoming available, and their clinical application will increase in the future.

Thrombolysis: the development of unit guidelines

A challenge remains to develop guidelines for practice which facilitate safer and effective administration of thrombolytic agents following acute myocardial infarction. Clinical trials have proven that early reperfusion of ischaemic myocardium following rapid diagnosis, aspirin administration, analgesia and the instigation of an appropriate thrombolytic regime reduces mortality rates. Accordingly, as thrombolysis becomes the buzzword of the 1990s, controversy has resulted in substantial variations in practice of thrombolytic strategies within the UK (FTTCC 1994). The purpose of this review article is to consider the importance of current research and its application to current practices. Topics under discussion include thrombolytic agents, antistreptokinase antibody, time delay, eligibility for thrombolytic treatment, and clinically proven therapeutic regimes; with a suggested admission protocol that facilitates bi-directional communication minimising time delay and preventing inappropriate, cost-inefficient admissions to critical care areas. The results of this provide a logistical basis to thrombolytic therapy, and the subsequent development of effective and safe algorithmic guidelines in a busy medical intensive care unit.