Primary angioplasty is cost-minimizing compared with pre-hospital thrombolysis for patients within 60 min of a percutaneous coronary intervention center: the Comparison of Angioplasty and Pre-hospital Thrombolysis in Acute Myocardial Infarction (CAPTIM) cost-efficacy sub-study.

OBJECTIVES: This ancillary study of the Comparison of Angioplasty and Pre-hospital Thrombolysis in Acute Myocardial Infarction (CAPTIM) trial sought to assess the cost-efficacy ratio of primary coronary angioplasty (PCA) and pre-hospital thrombolysis (PHT) in patients suffering from an acute myocardial infarction (AMI) (<6 h) close to (<60 min journey) a percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) center. BACKGROUND: In the CAPTIM study, at 30 days follow-up PCA was as equally effective as PHT with rescue angioplasty if needed. The cost efficacy of these two strategies has not yet been compared. METHODS: Data were prospectively collected for 299 patients in three centers. The efficacy analysis was extended at one-year follow-up for those patients. Direct fixed and variable actual costs were assessed with a piggyback data collection. RESULTS: The one-year primary end point event-rate (death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and stroke) was not different after PCA or PHT (14% vs. 16. 4%, p = NS). Costs were lower in the PCA group either during the in-hospital period (8,287 vs. 9,170 $, p = 0.0001) and after one-year follow-up, in relation to a higher rate of subsequent revascularizations in the PHT group (49% vs. 23%, p < 0. 01), leading to a longer hospital stay (10 vs. 9.1 days, p = 0. 03). CONCLUSIONS: After AMI in patients less than 1 h from a PCI center, PCA is as effective and less costly than a combined strategy of PHT followed by rescue angioplasty.

Is primary angioplasty more effective than prehospital fibrinolysis in diabetics with acute myocardial infarction? Data from the CAPTIM randomized clinical trial.

AIMS: The CAPTIM study randomized patients managed within 6 h of acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction to primary angioplasty or prehospital fibrinolysis (rt-PA), with immediate transfer to a centre with interventional facilities. It found a similar incidence of the primary endpoint of death, recurrent MI, or stroke at 30 days with both strategies. We report here the outcome in the diabetic subgroup. METHODS AND RESULTS: The relationship of diabetic status (diabetics, n=103, non-diabetics, n=731) and treatment strategy with the occurrence of the primary endpoint and of death was analysed. Compared with non-diabetics, diabetics had a higher baseline risk profile, a higher rate of the primary endpoint (14.6 vs. 5.6%; P=0.002), and a high rate of mortality (8.7 vs. 3.1%; P=0.01) at 30 days. The incidence of the primary endpoint tended to be higher in diabetics randomized to prehospital fibrinolysis compared with those randomized to primary angioplasty [21.7 vs. 8.8% (10/46 vs. 5/57); RR: 2.47 (0.91-6.74); P=0.09]. This difference was driven by the higher mortality in the fibrinolysis group [13.0 vs. 5.3% (6/46 vs. 3/57); RR: 2.47 (0.7-9.4); P=0.29]. For non-diabetics, no such trend was observed. Compared with non-diabetics, diabetics had a much higher rate of rescue angioplasty (41.4 vs. 23.5%; P=0.01) and a higher mortality after rescue angioplasty [17.4 vs. 0% (4/23 vs. 0/90); P=0.001]. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that diabetic patients presenting within 6 h of an acute myocardial infarction may derive particular benefit from a strategy of primary angioplasty. However, the small number of diabetic patients in this subgroup analysis does not allow a final conclusion and a specifically designed study is warranted.