Skip Navigation


European Heart Journal Advance Access originally published online on March 1, 2007
European Heart Journal 2007 28(6):655-656; doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehl577
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
28/6/655    most recent
ehl577v1
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Related articles in EHJ
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Mak, K.-H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Mak, K.-H.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The European Society of Cardiology 2007. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Benefits of transfer primary angioplasty are durable, so why are we waiting?

Koon-Hou Mak*

Gleneagles Medical Centre, Department of Cardiology, 6 Napier Road No. 04-14, Singapore 258499, Singapore

* Corresponding author. Tel: +65 6476 0880; fax: +65 6475 0880. E-mail address: makkh001@yahoo.com

This editorial refers to ‘Long-term outcomes of patients with acute myocardial infarction presenting to hospitals without catheterization laboratory and randomized to immediate thrombolysis or interhospital transport for primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Five years' follow-up of the PRAGUE-2 trial’ {dagger} by P. Widimsky et al., on page 679

The first 10% of the full text of this article appears below.

Myocardial infarction is an important public health problem worldwide. Rapid restoration of flow remains as the foundation for life-saving treatment of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). In Europe, it is heartening to note that the utilization of reperfusion therapies was increasingly, with the proportion rising from 55.8% in 2000–2001 to 63.9% in 2004, based on the first and second Euro Heart Surveys of Acute Coronary Syndromes, respectively.1 Notably, patients were more likely to receive primary percutaneous coronary intervention (increased from 37 to 59% over the same period),1 probably because of the favourable results derived from . . . [Full Text of this Article]


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?

Related articles in EHJ:

Long-term outcomes of patients with acute myocardial infarction presenting to hospitals without catheterization laboratory and randomized to immediate thrombolysis or interhospital transport for primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Five years' follow-up of the PRAGUE-2 trial
Petr Widimsky, Dana Bilkova, Martin Penicka, Martin Novak, Miroslava Lanikova, Vladimir Porizka, Ladislav Groch, Michael Zelizko, Tomas Budesinsky, Michael Aschermann, and on behalf of the PRAGUE Study Group Investigators
EHJ 2007 28: 679-684. [Abstract] [FREE Full Text]  



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J Am Coll CardiolHome page
S. D. Kristensen, H. Baumgartner, H. Drexler, E. Eeckhout, G. Filippatos, A. K. Gitt, C. Linde, L. A. Pierard, D. Poldermans, H. Schunkert, et al.
Highlights of the 2007 Scientific Sessions of the European Society of Cardiology: Vienna, Austria, September 1 5, 2007
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., December 18, 2007; 50(25): 2421 - 2430.
[Full Text] [PDF]