Assessing the effectiveness of primary angioplasty compared with thrombolysis and its relationship to time delay: a Bayesian evidence synthesis. Issue 10 (3rd February 2007)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Asseburg, Christian; Bravo Vergel, Yolanda; Palmer, Stephen; Fenwick, Elisabeth; de Belder, Mark; Abrams, Keith R; Sculpher, Mark
• Is Part Of: Heart. Volume 93:Issue 10(2007)
• Page Start: 1244
• Page End: 1250
• Publication Date: 2007-02-03
• Subjects: acute myocardial infarction -- primary coronary angioplasty -- thrombolytics -- meta-regression; Heart -- Diseases -- Treatment -- Periodicals; Cardiology -- Periodicals; 616.12
• DOI: 10.1136/hrt.2006.093336
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1355-6037

Abstract

Abstract : Background: Meta-analyses of trials have shown greater benefits from angioplasty than thrombolysis after an acute myocardial infarction, but the time delay in initiating angioplasty needs to be considered. Objective: To extend earlier meta-analyses by considering 1- and 6-month outcome data for both forms of reperfusion. To use Bayesian statistical methods to quantify the uncertainty associated with the estimated relationships. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis published in 2003 was updated. Data on key clinical outcomes and the difference between time-to-balloon and time-to-needle were independently extracted by two researchers. Bayesian statistical methods were used to synthesise evidence despite differences between reported follow-up times and outcomes. Outcomes are presented as absolute probabilities of specific events and odds ratios (ORs; with 95% credible intervals (CrI)) as a function of the additional time delay associated with angioplasty. Results: 22 studies were included in the meta-analysis, with 3760 and 3758 patients randomised to primary angioplasty and thrombolysis, respectively. The mean (SE) angioplasty-related time delay (over and above time to thrombolysis) was 54.3 (2.2) minutes. For this delay, mean event probabilities were lower for primary angioplasty for all outcomes. Mortality within 1 month was 4.5% after angioplasty and 6.4% after thrombolysis (OR = 0.68 (95% CrI 0.46 to 1.01)). For non-fatal reinfarction, OR = 0.32 (95% CrI 0.20 to 0.51); for non-fatal stroke OR = 0.24 (95% CrI 0.11 to 0.50). For all outcomes, the benefit of angioplasty decreased with longer delay from initiation. Conclusions: The benefit of primary angioplasty, over thrombolysis, depends on the former's additional time delay. For delays of 30–90 minutes, angioplasty is superior for 1-month fatal and non-fatal outcomes. For delays of around 90 minutes thrombolysis may be the preferred option as assessed by 6-month mortality; there is considerable uncertainty for longer time delays.