Abstract

BackgroundThe Trial of Routine Angioplasty and Stenting after Fibrinolysis to Enhance Reperfusion in Acute Myocardial Infarction (TRANSFER-AMI) demonstrated superiority of routine early coronary angiography (and percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI]) compared with standard therapy in fibrinolytic-treated patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) at 30 days. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the long-term (>7 year) effects of an early invasive strategy. MethodsWe linked the study cohort and administrative datasets to assess long-term follow-up status including repeat procedures, hospitalizations, and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analysis were used to evaluate the relationship between randomized treatment and long-term adverse outcomes. ResultsA total of 881 patients had long-term follow-up and were included in our study. After a mean follow-up of 7.8 years, there were no significant differences in death, myocardial infarction (MI), unstable angina, stroke, transient ischemic attack (TIA), or heart failure admissions (hazard ratio [HR] 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.73–1.13]; P = 0.41) between those randomized to an early invasive vs standard treatment strategy. Following the index hospitalization, there were no significant difference in the rates of coronary revascularization between the early invasive and the standard therapy groups (81 [19.3%] vs 76 [17.9%]; P = 0.61). ConclusionsDespite the short-term benefit and safety of an early invasive strategy in patients with STEMI receiving fibrinolysis, no statistically significant differences in MACE were observed over 7.8 years.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call