Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||Percutaneous coronary intervention or prehospital thrombolysis? What is the preferred treatment in S-T elevation myocardial infarction?|
|Epworth Authors:||Hiscock, Martin|
|Keywords:||Emergency Medical Services|
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
S-T Elevation Myocardial Infarction
Acute Coronary Syndrome
Epworth Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
|Publisher:||Royal Australasian College of Physicians|
|Citation:||Intern Med J. 2012 Oct;42 Suppl 5:44-6|
|Abstract:||There is no situation in medicine where outcome is so utterly dependent on time than in the treatment of patients with S-T elevation myocardial infarction. This life-threatening situation accounts for 30% of acute coronary syndromes. Prompt myocardial reperfusion saves lives, but health services need to be thoroughly organised to achieve this outcome. Unfortunately, a minority of patients in Australia present within 2 h of symptom onset and most patients receive reperfusion 3-4 h after. So health professionals begin at a disadvantage. A novel approach to this problem has been to give thrombolysis at first contact with the patient, before admission to hospital. A French study has assessed this practice against the gold standard treatment for S-T elevation myocardial infarction with some very interesting results. The implications of this study now challenge well-entrenched guidelines for the management of patients with this condition.|
|Journal Title:||Internal Medicine Journal|
|Appears in Collections:||Cardiac Sciences|
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in EKB are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.