THROMBOLYSIS OR PRIMARY PCI FOR MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION WITH ST-SEGMENT ELEVATION? THE STREAM TRIAL (STRATEGIC REPERFUSION EARLY AFTER MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION)

Ambiguous data about comparability regarding clinical outcomes for prehospital thrombolysis, coupled with timely coronary angiography, and primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the early after acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), there are now.
In the STREAM trial 1892 patients with STEMI diagnosed within 3 hours after onset of symptoms, and whom it was impossible to perform primary PCI within 1 h after the first medical contact, were randomly assigned into two treatment groups: a) primary PCI b) prehospital thrombolytic therapy with bolus tenecteplase (dose decreased by half in patients aged ≥75 years) in combination with clopidogrel and enoxaparin followed by admission to the hospital, where it was possible to perform PCI. Emergency coronary angiography performed if thrombolysis failed. Coronary angiography and PCI of the infarct-related artery were performed in the period from 6 to 24 hours after randomization and thrombolytic therapy in the case of an effective thrombolysis. Primary endpoints include a composite of death, shock, congestive heart failure, or reinfarction up to 30 days.
The primary endpoint occurred in 116 of 939 patients (12.4 %) of the thrombolysis group and in 135 of 943 patients (14.3%) of the primary PCI group (relative risk in the group thrombolysis 0.86, 95% confidence interval 0.68-1.09, p=0.21). Emergency angiography was required in 36.3% of patients in the thrombolysis, and the remaining patients, coronary angiography and PCI were performed at a mean of 17 hours after randomization and thrombolytic therapy. Thrombolysis group had more intracranial hemorrhages than primary PCI group (1.0% vs 0.2%, p=0.04; after correction protocol and dose reduction by half of tenecteplase in patients ≥75 years: 0.5% vs. 0.3%, p=0.45). The rate of non- intracranial bleeding in two treatment groups did not differ.
Prehospital thrombolysis followed by coronary angiography and timely PCI provide effective reperfusion in patients in the early stages of STEMI that was not possible to carry out primary PCI within 1 h after the first medical contact. Nevertheless, fibrinolysis was associated with a slight increase in the risk of intracranial bleeding.

acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, fibrinolysis, percutaneous coronary intervention

1. Steg PG, James SK, Atar D, et al. ESC guidelines for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST segment elevation. Eur Heart J 2012;33:2569-619.

2. O’Gara PT, Kushner FG, Ascheim DD, et al. 2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013;61(4): e78-e140.

3. Armstrong PW, Boden WE. Reperfusion paradox in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Ann Intern Med 2011; 155:389-91

4. Armstrong PW, Gershlick AH, Goldstein P, et al. Fibrinolysis or Primary PCI in ST-Segment Elevation, N Engl J Med 2013;368:1379-87

5. Armstrong PW, Gershlick A, Goldstein P, et al. The Strategic Reperfusion Early After Myocardial Infarction (STREAM) study. Am Heart J 2010;160(1):30.e1-35.e1.

6. Larson DM, Duval S, Sharkey SW, et al. Safety and efficacy of a pharmacoinvasive reperfusion strate- gy in rural STelevation myocardial infarction patients with expected delays due to long-distance transfers. Eur Heart J 2012;33:1232-40.

7. Harrell FE Jr. Hmisc: Harrell Miscellaneous – R package, version 3.8-3. 2010. (http://cran.r-pro- ject.org/package=Hmisc).

8. Assessment of the Safety and Efficacy of a New Treatment Strategy with Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (ASSENT-4 PCI) investigators. Primary versus tenecteplase-facilitated percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction (ASSENT-4 PCI): randomised trial. Lancet 2006;367:569-78.

9. Le May MR, Wells GA, Labinaz M, et al. Combined angioplasty and pharmacological intervention versus thrombolysis alone in acute myocardial infarction (CAPITAL AMI study). J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;46:417-24.

10. Armstrong PW, WEST Steering Committee. A comparison of pharma- cologic 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. Eur Heart J 2006;27:1530-8.

11. Cantor W, Fitchett D, Borgundvaag B, et al., for the TRANSFER-AMI Trial Investigators. Routine Early Angioplasty after Fibrinolysis for Acute Myocardial Infarction. N Engl J Med 2009; 360 (26):2705-18.

12. Fernandez-Aviles F, Alonso JJ, Pena G, et al. Primary angioplasty vs early routine post-fibrinolysis angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction with ST-segment elevation: the GRACIA-2 non-inferiority, randomized, controlled trial. Eur Heart J 2007;28:949-60.

13. Boehmer E, Hoffmann P, Abdelnoor M, et al. Efficacy and Safety of Immediate Angioplasty Versus Ischemia-Guided Management After Thrombolysis in Acute Myocardial Infarction in Areas With Very Long Transfer Distances. Results of the NORDISTEMI (NORwegian study on DIstrict treatment of ST- Elevation Myocardial Infarction) J Am Coll Cardiol 2010; 55:102-10.

14. Andersen HR, Nielsen TT, Rasmussen K, et al. A comparison of coronary angioplasty with fibrinolytic therapy in acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 2003; 349:733-42.

15. Kaul S, Diamond GA, Weintraub WS. Trials and tribulations of non-inferiority: the ximelagatran experience. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;46:1986-95.