Abstract

Although both the European Cooperative Study Group and the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction IIB trial indicated that angiography and angioplasty as routine measures after thrombolytic treatment do not improve clinical outcome in patients with acute myocardial infarction, the potential benefit of angioplasty may have been negated by the fact that the procedure was performed too soon (less than 32 hours) after admission. A similar study was designed in which delayed invasive treatment was compared with conservative treatment in 201 patients with acute myocardial infarction given recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator. The 97 patients randomized to the invasive group underwent routine coronary angiography and angioplasty 5 +/- 2 days after thrombolytic therapy, whereas the 104 patients randomized to the conservative group underwent angiography only for recurrent postinfarction angina or exercise-induced ischemia. Baseline characteristics of both groups were similar. In the invasive group, 92 patients underwent angiography, 49 angioplasty and 11 coronary artery bypass surgery. In the conservative group, 40 patients experienced early ischemia, 39 underwent angiography, 20 angioplasty and 4 coronary artery bypass surgery. Reinfarction rate and preservation of left ventricular function at discharge or 8 weeks after discharge did not differ in the 2 groups. Total mortality after a mean follow-up of 10 months was 8 of 97 in the invasive and 4 of 104 in the conservative groups (p = 0.15). However, if only patients who died after the timing of the scheduled protocol catheterization in the invasive arm were included, mortality was 5 of 94 and 0 of 100 in the invasive and conservative treatment groups, respectively (p = 0.02). (ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)