[Comparative effectiveness of intracoronary and systemic thrombolytic therapy of acute myocardial infarction]

Area of Science:

• Cardiology
• Thrombolytic Therapy

Background:

• Coronary artery disease management often involves thrombolytic therapy.
• Comparing systemic and intracoronary approaches is crucial for optimizing patient outcomes.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare the efficacy and safety of systemic streptodekase versus intracoronary avelysine.
• To evaluate reperfusion rates, mortality, and complications associated with each thrombolytic therapy method.

Main Methods:

• Systemic thrombolytic therapy using streptodekase.
• Intracoronary thrombolytic therapy using avelysine.
• Monitoring of coronary blood flow restoration, death rates, and myocardial infarction complications.

Main Results:

• Both therapies demonstrated comparable effects on restoring coronary blood flow.
• Reperfusion rates were 72.7% for intracoronary and 66.7% for systemic therapy.
• Mortality rates were similar (9.1% vs. 8.9%), with slightly higher complications in the intracoronary group.

Conclusions:

• Systemic streptodekase therapy is a viable alternative to intracoronary avelysine.
• Systemic therapy is preferred in settings without immediate surgical intervention due to its ease of administration and safety profile.