Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘streptokinase vs tpa’

How early one can shift a patient for rescue PCI after failed thrombolysis ?

  1.  Wait for at-least 24  hours.
  2. A minimum  cool off period of 2 hours is required.
  3. It is never an issue . Rush the patient  immediately to cath lab
  4. The question does not arise  . Often times ,  rescue PCI is a dead concept  as  sufficient damage has happened !

Answer

The irony of  medical science  lies in our belief that every medical query  has a specific answer ! In reality it is rarely true.   In this instance , any of  the above can be a correct response.

A patient with  failed thrombolysis can belong to any of the  64 possible combinations*  based on  time of  thrombolysis , extent of  MI,  associated complications, co- morbid conditions , presence of symptoms . (For example there is  a sub groups of patient with  failed thrombolysis still  asymptomatic  and comfortable )

The issues for rescue PCI  do not  arise  in a   sinking STEMI (Cardiogenic shock ) , or  STEMI with persistent angina. There  is  no  management issues in  these patients  .They need to be rushed to cath lab. Unfortunately  in  impending  LVF or manifest LVF (But not in shock )  decision making is tough , as doing a PCI in patients  with basal crackles  and hypoxia is a real challenge .These are the patients who are likely  to hit hard  from the hazards of the procedure .Extreme caution is required.

I have seen  significant cohort  of  asymptomatic hypotensive patients getting converted into   drug resistant, IABP dependent refractory shock after PCI  ,  making every one look  pathetic  !  The  only solace for the interventionist  is  the gratification  of  stenting the  IRA !

This  happens  , in spite  of having  multi national trained  in house critical care anesthetics and  dual core processing IABP  . Realise  what we need is delicate decision making ,  So use extreme diligence in selecting patients with impeding shock .

Your medical management can  provide  more teeth to stabilise your patient than a PCI .If you are doubt discuss with your learned colleagues .  ( If you  do not  ask for evidence for  this statement , probably  it would confirm  you  as  an  experienced   cardiologist  !)

Real issues pushed to the sidelines ?

While the real issue  in the timing of rescue PCI  may be  different , the discussion traditionally  revolves around   hemo-rheological aspects . We know  the lytics and PCI do not combine well for two reasons.

  • Pro-coagulant nature of lytic state .
  • Excess bleeding risk at puncture site.

Now ,  we have evidence to say fibrin specific lytics  TPA, TNKTPA has less of this issue . ( NORDISTEMI)

Patients who receive  fibrin specific lytics  can  safely  be  taken for rescue PCI  in case it is needed without any increased risk .

Bleeding complication  has dramatically reduced as radial procedures are done often even in emergency setting.

Vascular occlusive devices  have added to our comfort.

* The definition of failed  thrombolysis by  itself is not standardized . Is it symptom guided ?  or ECG / enzyme / echo guided  ? A patient with  infarct  related chest pain (dull aching )  after thromolysis can be labeled as post infarct refractory angina and rushed for emergency angiogram .(This is due to our ignorance  about  the  residual pain signals  through  type c pain fibres  for up to 24 hours )

Final message

The indication and  timing of rescue PCI is  primarily  related   to the  overall   patient profile  rather than the bleeding or pro-coagulant issues .

Although   pro-coagulant  lytic state is based on weak scientific  foundation , it  is a blessing in disguise  as it  can  act  as a deterrent  in restricting  inappropriate rescue PCI !

Read Full Post »