Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 5, 2026

Prehospital Thrombolysis: A Manual from Berlin
Published on: November 27, 2013
Logistical problems in prehospital thrombolysis
J Brügemann1, J van der Meer, P A de Graeff
1Department of Cardiology, University of Groningen, The Netherlands.
Insights
Prehospital thrombolytic treatment for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) using anistreplase was not feasible in a medium-sized town. This approach led to significant time delays and is unlikely to provide clinical benefits.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Emergency Medicine
- Pharmacology
Background:
- Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) requires rapid treatment for optimal outcomes.
- Thrombolytic therapy is a critical intervention for AMI.
- Prehospital treatment strategies aim to reduce time to reperfusion.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the efficacy and safety of prehospital versus in-hospital thrombolytic treatment with anistreplase in AMI patients.
- To assess the feasibility of prehospital thrombolytic administration by paramedics and general practitioners.
Main Methods:
- A study involving 350 patients screened for chest pain and potential AMI.
- Inclusion criteria: absence of contraindications and confirmation of AMI via telephone-transmitted ECG.
- Randomization of eligible patients to either prehospital or in-hospital treatment arms.
Main Results:
- Only 16 patients (5%) were eligible, with just 7 (2%) randomized over 6 months.
- Major barriers to inclusion included advanced age, prolonged chest pain duration (>4 hours), and logistical issues.
- Prehospital ECG procedures significantly increased time spent at home (38 min vs. 14 min).
Conclusions:
- Prehospital intravenous thrombolytic therapy for AMI is not feasible in a medium-sized town setting.
- The current prehospital approach leads to unnecessary time delays, negating potential clinical benefits.
- In-hospital treatment remains the more practical and effective strategy for thrombolysis in AMI.
Abstract:
In this study we compared efficacy and safety of prehospital with in-hospital thrombolytic treatment with anistreplase in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Three-hundred and fifty patients with chest pain were screened for eligibility by the municipal ambulance staff and/or the general practitioner. Patients were included in the absence of contraindications and if the telephone-transmitted ECG showed AMI. In a 6 month period 16 patients (5%) were eligible, but only seven (2%) were randomized. Age over 70 years, duration of chest pain for longer than 4 h and logistic problems were the major factors responsible for the low inclusion rate. The mean time spent at home with and without the ECG procedure was 38 +/- 14 and 14 +/- 8 min, respectively (P less than 0.001). These results demonstrate that in a medium sized town prehospital delivery of intravenous thrombolytic therapy by paramedics and/or the general practitioner is not feasible, leads to unnecessary time delay and may therefore yield no clinical benefits.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Anticoagulant Drugs: Low-Molecular-Weight Heparins
Clot Retraction and Fibrinolysis
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation IV: Pharmacological Management
Venous Thrombosis III: Interprofessional Care
Venous Thrombosis IV: Nursing Management
Pulmonary Embolism II: Diagnostic Studies and Interprofessional Care

