Benefit of onsite reperfusion therapy or transfer to primary PCI in STEMI patients admitted to hospitals without catheterization laboratory. Results of the MITRA PLUS Registry

References

• Bonnefoy E., Lapostolle F., Leizorovicz A., Steg G., McFadden E. P., Dubien P. Y., et al. Comparison of Angioplasty and Prehospital Thromboysis in Acute Myocardial Infarction study group. Primary angioplasty versus prehospital fibrinolysis in acute myocardial infarction: a randomised study. Lancet 2002; 360: 825–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rathore S. S., Weinfurt K. P., Foody J. M., Krumholz H. M. Perfomance of the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) ST‐ST‐elevation myocardial infarction risk score in a national cohort of elderly patients. Am Heart J 2005; 150: 402–10
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stenestrand U., Wallentin L., for the Register of Information and Knowledge about Swedish Heart Intensive Care Admissions (RIKS‐HIA). Fibrinolytic therapy in patients 75 years and older with ST‐segment‐elevation myocardial infarction. Arch Intern Med 2003; 163: 965–71
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• American Heart Association. 2002 heart and stroke statistical update. American Heart Association, Dallas, (Text)
   Google Scholar
• Andersen H. R., Nielsen T. T., Rasmussen K., Thuesen L., Kelbaek H., Thayssen P., , for the DANAMI‐2 Investigators, et al. A comparison of coronary angioplasty with fibrinolytic therapy in acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 2003; 349: 733–42
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rustige J., Schiele R., Burczyk U., Koch A., Gottwik M., Neuhaus K. L., et al. The 60 minutes myocardial infarction project. Treatment and clinical outcome of patients with acute myocardial infarction in Germany. Eur Heart J 1997; 18: 1438–46
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Schuster S., Koch A., Burczyk U., Schiele R., Wagner S., Zahn R., , for the MITRA study group, et al. Therapy of acute myocardial infarction, impact of trials on clinical practice: The MITRA pilot phase. Z Kardiol 1997; 86: 273–83
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wagner S., Schneider S., Schiele R., Fischer F., Dehn H., Grube R., et al. Acute myocardial infarction in Germany between 1996 and 1998; therapy and intrahospital course: results of the myocardial infarction registry (MIR) in Germany. Z Kardiol 1999; 88: 857–67
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gitt A. K., Schiele R., Meiser F., Wienbergen H., Heer T., et al. Myocardial infarction redefined: implication of the new definition of non‐ST‐segment elevation myocardial infarction on clinical practice: results of the ACOS‐registry. Eur Heart J 2001; 22((suppl))3276
   Google Scholar
• Wienbergen H., Gitt A. K., Schiele R., Juenger C., Heer T., Vogel C., , For the ACOS study group, et al. Different treatments and outcomes of consecutive patients with non‐ST‐elevation myocardial infarction depending on initial electrocardiographic changes. Am J Cardiol 2004; 93: 1543–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zeymer U., Gitt A., Winkler R., Zahn R., Jünger C., Schiele R., et al. Mortality of patients who are older than 75 years after ST elevation myocardial infarction in clinical practice. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 2005; 130: 633–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thiemann D. R., Coresh J., Schulman S. P., Gerstenblith G., Oetgen W. J., Powe N. R. Lack of benefit for intravenous thrombolysis in patients with myocardial infarction who are older than 75 years. Circulation 2000; 101: 2239–46
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bednar F., Widimsky P., Krupicka J., Groch L., Aschermann M., Zelizko M., PRAGUE Study Group Investigators. Interhospital transport for primary angioplasty improves the long‐term outcome of acute myocardial infarction compared with immediate thrombolysis in the nearest hospital (one‐year follow‐up of the PRAGUE‐1 study). Can J Cardiol 2003; 19: 1133–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Widimský P., Budešínský T., Voráč D., Groch L., Želízko M., Aschermann M., , on behalf of the ‘PRAGUE’ Study Group Investigators, 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. Eur Heart J 2003; 24: 94–104
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nallamothu B. K., Bates E. R., Herrin J., Wang Y., Bradley E. H., Krumholz H. M., NRMI Investigators. Times to treatment in transfer patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention in the United States: National Registry of Myocardial Infarction (NRMI)‐3/4 analysis. Circulation 2005; 111: 761–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mehta R. H., Sadiq I., Goldberg R. J., Gore J. M., Avezum A., Spencer F., , GRACE Investigators, et al. Effectiveness of primary percutaneous coronary intervention compared with that of thrombolytic therapy in elderly patients with acute myocardial infarction. Am Heart J 2004; 147: 253–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grines C. L., Westerhausen D. R., Jr., Grines L. L., Hanlon J. T., Logemann T. L., Niemela M., , Air PAMI Study Group, 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. J Am Coll Cardiol 2002; 39: 1713–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeGeare V. S., Stone G. W., Grines L., Brodie B. R., Cox D. A., Garcia E., et al. Angiographic and clinical characteristics associated with increased in‐hospital mortality in elderly patients with acute myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous intervention (a pooled analysis of the primary angioplasty in myocardial infarction trials). Am J Cardiol 2000; 86: 30–4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar