Frequency and clinical outcome of cardiogenic shock during acute myocardial infarction among patients receiving reteplase or alteplase. Results from GUSTO-III

Aims Reteplase has been reported to achieve better patency of the infarct artery than alteplase. As infarct artery patency is strongly associated with survival among patients with cardiogenic shock, we postulated that treatment with reteplase would improve outcomes among shock patients. Methods We compared 30-day mortality rates among patients in GUSTO-III who either presented with shock or developed shock after enrolment; all patients received either front-loaded alteplase or reteplase (two bolus doses of 10 MU, 30min apart). Results Shock occurred in 260 (5·3%) of 4921 patients randomized to alteplase and 560 (5·5%) of 10138 patients randomized to reteplase. Of these patients, 28 (10·8%) and 55 (9·8%) randomized to alteplase and reteplase, respectively, presented with shock. In-hospital, 35% and 37% of shock patients assigned to alteplase or reteplase, respectively, underwent coronary angiography, with similar rates of percutaneous (∼11–13%) or surgical (∼2–3%) revascularization procedures subsequently performed. Death within 30 days occurred in 169 (65%) and 353 (63%) shock patients randomized to alteplase and reteplase, respectively (P=0·59). Of patients presenting with shock, 64% and 58% of patients randomized to alteplase or reteplase died within 30 days (P=0·59). Conclusion Compared with alteplase, reteplase did not improve outcome among patients who presented with shock or developed shock after receiving thrombolytics. The newer-generation thrombolytic agents remain oflimited efficacy in the treatment and prevention of shock.