Adjuvants to thrombolysis after acute myocardial infarction

References

• Ohman EM, Califf RM, Topol EJ, et al. Consequences of reocclusion after successful reperfusion therapy in acute myocardial infarction. Circulation 1990; 82(3): 781–91
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ISIS-2 (Second International Study of Infarct Survival) Collaborative Group. Randomised trial of intravenous streptokinase, oral aspirin, both, or neither among 17,187 cases of suspected acute myocardial infarction: ISIS-2. Lancet 1988; 2(8607): 349–60
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacMahon S, Collins R, Knight C, et al. Reduction in major morbidity and mortality by heparin in acute myocardial infarction. (Abstr) Circulation (Suppl II) 1988; 78(4): II-98
   Google Scholar
• Hsia J, Hamilton WP, Kleiman N, et al, for the Heparin-Aspirin Reperfusion Trial (HART) Investigators. A comparison between heparin and low-dose aspirin as adjunctive therapy with tissue plasminogen activator for acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1990; 323(21): 1433–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Selected highlights of the XII Congress of the European Society of Cardiology. Special report: early intravenous heparin improves patency with thrombolysis. Prim Cardiol 1990; 16(11): 11
   Google Scholar
• The SCATI (Studio sulla Calciparina nell'Angina e nella Trombosi Ventricolare nell'Infarto) Group. Randomised controlled trial of subcutaneous calcium-heparin in acute myocardial infarction. Lancet 1989; 2(8656): 182–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ISIS-3 (Third International Study of Infarct Survival) Collaborative Group. ISIS-3: a randomised comparison of streptokinase vs tissue plasminogen activator vs anistreplase and of aspirin plus heparin vs aspirin alone among 41,299 cases of suspected acute myocardial infarction. Lancet 1992; 339(8796): 753–70
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Sopravvivenza nell'Infarto Miocardico. GISSI-2: a factorial randomised trial of alteplase versus streptokinase and heparin versus no heparin among 12,490 patients with acute myocardial infarction. Lancet 1990; 336(8707): 65–71
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The GUSTO Investigators. An international randomized trial comparing four thrombolytic strategies for acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1993; 329(10): 673–82
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association Task Force Report. ACC/AHA guidelines for the early management of patients with acute myocardial infarction: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association task force on assessment of diagnostic and therapeutic cardiovascular procedures (subcommittee to develop guidelines for the early management of patients with acute myocardial infarction). Circulation 1990; 82(2): 664–707
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• The Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Coronary Arteries (GUSTO) IIa investigators. Randomized trial of intravenous heparin versus recombinant hirudin for acute coronary syndromes. Circulation 1994; 90(5): 1631–7
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Eckman MH, Wong JB, Salem DN, et al. Direct angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction: a review of outcomes in clinical subsets. Ann Intern Med 1992; 117(8): 667–76
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zijlstra F, de Boer MJ, Hoomtje JC, et al. A comparison of immediate coronary angioplasty with intravenous streptokinase in acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1993; 328(10): 680–4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grines CL, Browne KF, Marco J, et al, for the Primary Angioplasty in Myocardial Infarction Study Group. A comparison of immediate angioplasty with thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1993; 328(10): 673–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibbons RJ, Holmes DR, Reeder GS, et al, for the Mayo Coronary Care Unit and Catheterization Laboratory Groups. Immediate angioplasty compared with the administration of a thrombolytic agent followed by conservative treatment for myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1993; 328(10): 685–91
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hibbard MD, Holmes DR, Bailey KR, et al. Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty in patients with cardiogenic shock. J Am Coll Cardiol 1992; 19(3): 639–46
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Topol EJ, Califf RM, George BS, et al. A randomized trial of immediate versus delayed elective angioplasty after intravenous tissue plasminogen activator in acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1987; 317(10): 581–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rogers WJ, Baim DS, Gore JM, et al. Comparison of immediate invasive, delayed invasive, and conservative strategies after tissue-type plasminogen activator: results of the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) phase II-A trial. Circulation 1990; 81(5): 1457–76
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simoons ML, Arnold AE, Betriu A, et al. Thrombolysis with tissue plasminogen activator in acute myocardial infarction: no additional benefit from immediate percutaneous coronary angioplasty. Lancet 1988; 1(8579): 197–203
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muller DW, Topol EJ. Thrombolytic therapy: adjuvant mechanical intervention for acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol 1992; 69(2): 60–70A
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The TIMI Study Group. Comparison of invasive and conservative strategies after treatment with intravenous tissue plasminogen activator in acute myocardial infarction: results of the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) phase II trial. N Engl J Med 1989; 320(10): 618–27
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SWIFT (Should We Intervene Following Thrombolysis?) Trial Study Group. SWIFT trial of delayed elective intervention v conservative treatment after thrombolysis with anistreplase in acute myocardial infarction. BMJ 1991; 302(6776): 555–60
   PubMedGoogle Scholar