Comparison of primary percutaneous coronary intervention and streptokinase for acute isolated inferior ST elevation myocardial infarction with a predicted low risk profile

BACKGROUND: Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is the treatment of choice for acute myocardial infarction, especially for high-risk patients, but the data for low-risk patients are conflicting. A very low-risk subgroup of acute inferior myocardial infarction can be identified by electrocardiographic and clinical criteria during admission. We aimed to compare the outcomes of primary PCI and streptokinase treatment in this subgroup, which has not been evaluated separately before. MATERIAL/METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed in-hospital and 10-month follow-up outcomes of 97 patients with inferior acute myocardial infarction and clinical and electrocardiographic criteria predicting low risk who have been treated with primary PCI or streptokinase. RESULTS: Forty-eight patients received streptokinase, and 49 had undergone primary PCI. Both during the in-hospital period and follow-up, the groups did not differ in the end points of death, reinfarction, or stroke (in-hospital: 2.1% versus 4.1%, P=.57; follow-up: 8.9% versus 8.9%, P=1.000). Length of hospital stay was longer in the streptokinase group (6.5+/-2.5 versus 9.1+/-3.7 days, P=.001). Rate of repeat revascularization was reduced in the PCI group at 10 months (28.9% versus 55.6%, P=.002). CONCLUSIONS: When streptokinase and primary PCI are compared in isolated inferior acute myocardial infarction patients with a low-risk profile, there are no differences for in-hospital and long-term rates of death, reinfarction, or stroke. Primary angioplasty reduces the length of initial hospital stay, and reduces repeat admissions by decreasing the need for subsequent revascularization procedures. Large-scale studies are needed to reach a final conclusion.