[Efficacy and safety comparison between pro-urokinase and reteplase in the treatment of patients with acute ST elevation myocardial infarction].

Objective

To compare the efficacy and safety of pro-urokinase and reteplase in the treatment of patients with acute ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).

Methods

STEMI patients, who received intravenous thrombolytic therapy in Henan STEMI registry between September 2016 and August 2018, were eligible for this study. A total of 5479 patients from 66 hospitals were screened and patients were divided into pro-urokinase group (n=638) and reteplase group (n=702) according to thrombolytic drugs. Data including patient demographics, risk factors, medical histories, patient information at admission, in-hospital treatment, time delays, and clinical events were collected. The clinical recanalization rate, in-hospital mortality, in-hospital death or treatment withdrawal, in-hospital main adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE, death or treatment withdrawal, congestive heart failure, reinfarction and ischemic stroke) and post-thrombolysis bleeding were compared between the two groups. Bleeding events were evaluated with Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) criteria.

Results

The median age [61.8 (53.2, 69.0) vs. 62.6 (52.1, 69.8), P=0.833] or the proportion of women [23.0% (147/638) vs. 25.1% (176/702), P=0.385] were similar between the pro-urokinase and reteplase groups. Clinical recanalization rates were similar between the pro-urokinase and reteplase groups [82.1% (524/638) vs. 84.9% (596/702), P=0.172], and there was no difference in the median time from onset to thrombolysis [194.5 (135.0,290.0) min vs. 190 (126.0,292.0) min, P=0.431] and the median recanalization time [95 (67.5,120.0) min vs. 95 (71.0,119.0) min, P=0.561] between the two groups. There was no significant difference in in-hospital mortality [5.5% (35/638) vs. 5.1% (36/702), P =0.770], in-hospital all-cause mortality, treatment withdrawal [8.9% (57/638) vs.7.7% (54/702), P=0.410], and in-hospital MACCE [13.0% (83/638) vs. 10.4% (73/702), P=0.137] between pro-urokinase and reteplase groups. However, the incidence of post-thrombolysis bleeding was significantly higher in reteplase group than in pro-urokinase group [7.8% (55/702) vs. 3.8% (24/638), P=0.002]. Further analysis found that the incidence of oral bleeding and the BARC grades 1-2 bleeding were significantly higher in reteplase group than in pro-urokinase group, whereas the incidence of cerebral hemorrhage was similar between the two groups [0.6% (4/638) vs. 0.4% (3/702), P=0.715]. The comparison of efficacy and safety outcomes between the two groups after adjusting for baseline characteristics using general linear mixed models was consistent with those before the adjustment. There was no significant difference in in-hospital mortality, in-hospital death or treatment withdrawal, in-hospital MACCE after adjusting for baseline characteristics and post-thrombolysis bleeding between the two groups.

Conclusions

Pro-urokinase and reteplase have similar clinical efficacy in the treatment of STEMI. In terms of safety, the incidence of cerebral hemorrhage is similar, while the incidence of BARC grades 1-2 bleeding and oral bleeding is higher in reteplase group than in pro-urokinase group, which has no impact on in-hospital outcomes.