Display Settings:

Format

Send to:

Choose Destination
We are sorry, but NCBI web applications do not support your browser and may not function properly. More information
    Eur Heart J. 2006 Jul;27(13):1530-8. Epub 2006 Jun 6.

    A comparison of pharmacologic therapy with/without timely coronary intervention vs. primary percutaneous intervention early after ST-elevation myocardial infarction: the WEST (Which Early ST-elevation myocardial infarction Therapy) study.

    Source

    Canadian VIGOUR Centre, 2-51 Medical Sciences Building, University of Alberta Edmonton, AB, Canada T6G 2H7. paul.armstrong@ualberta.ca

    Abstract

    AIMS:

    Uncertainty exists as to which reperfusion strategy for ST-elevation myocardial infarction (MI) is optimal. We evaluated whether optimal pharmacologic therapy at the earliest point of care, emphasizing pre-hospital randomization and treatment was non-inferior to expeditious primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

    METHODS AND RESULTS:

    Which Early ST-elevation myocardial infarction Therapy (WEST) was a four-city Canadian, open-label, randomized, feasibility study of 304 STEMI patients (> 4 mm ST-elevation/deviation) within 6 h of symptom onset, emphasizing pre-hospital ambulance treatment and participation of community and tertiary care centres. All received aspirin, subcutaneous enoxaparin (1 mg/kg), and were randomized to one of three groups: (A) tenecteplase (TNK) and usual care, (B) TNK and mandatory invasive study < or = 24 h, including rescue PCI for reperfusion failure, and (C) primary PCI with 300 mg loading dose of clopidogrel. Time from symptom onset to treatment was rapid (to TNK for A = 113 and B = 130 min and for PCI in C = 176 min). The primary outcome, a composite of 30-day death, re-infarction, refractory ischaemia, congestive heart failure, cardiogenic shock, and major ventricular arrhythmia, was 25% (Group A), 24% (Group B), and 23% (Group C), respectively. However, there was a higher frequency of the combination of death and recurrent MI in Group A vs. Group C (13.0 vs. 4.0%, respectively, P-logrank = 0.021), yet no difference between Group B (6.7%, P-logrank = 0.378) and C.

    CONCLUSION:

    These data suggest that a contemporary pharmacologic regimen rapidly delivered, coupled with a strategy of regimented rescue and routine coronary intervention within 24 h of initial treatment, may not be different from timely expert PCI.

    Comment in

    PMID:
    16757491
    [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
    Free full text

      Supplemental Content

      Icon for HighWire

      Save items

      Recent activity

      Your browsing activity is empty.

      Activity recording is turned off.

      Turn recording back on

      See more...
      Write to the Help Desk