Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Practice Point
  • Published:

ASSENT-4 PCI: should facilitated percutaneous coronary intervention be used in clinical practice?

Nature Clinical Practice Cardiovascular Medicine volume 3, pages 420–421 (2006)Cite this article

boxed-textAssessment of the Safety and Efficacy of a New Treatment Strategy with Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (ASSENT-4 PCI) investigators (2006) Primary versus tenecteplase-facilitated percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction (ASSENT-4 PCI): randomised trial. Lancet 367: 569–578

The use of full-dose tenecteplase for facilitation of primary PCI in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction is harmful and cannot be recommended

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Stone GW et al. (2001) Normal flow (TIMI-3) before mechanical reperfusion therapy is an independent determinant of survival in acute myocardial infarction: analysis from the primary angioplasty in myocardial infarction trials. Circulation 104: 636–641

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Roe MT et al. (2001) Shifting the open-artery hypothesis downstream: the quest for optimal reperfusion. J Am Coll Cardiol 37: 9–18

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Ellis SG et al. (2004) Facilitated percutaneous coronary intervention versus primary percutaneous coronary intervention: design and rationale of the Facilitated Intervention with Enhanced Reperfusion Speed to Stop Events (FINESSE) trial. Am Heart J 147: E16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Keeley EC et al. (2006) Comparison of primary and facilitated percutaneous coronary interventions for ST-elevation myocardial infarction: quantitative review of randomized trials. Lancet 367: 579–588

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Jacobs AK et al. (2006) Recommendation to develop strategies to increase the number of ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients with timely access to primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Circulation 113: 2152–2163

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The synopsis was written by Hannah Camm, Associate Editor, Nature Clinical Practice.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Interventional Cardiology,

    Kanwar P Singh & Matthew T Roe

  2. Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA

    Kanwar P Singh & Matthew T Roe

Authors
  1. Kanwar P Singh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Matthew T Roe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kanwar P Singh.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Singh, K., Roe, M. ASSENT-4 PCI: should facilitated percutaneous coronary intervention be used in clinical practice?. Nat Rev Cardiol 3, 420–421 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1038/ncpcardio0626

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ncpcardio0626

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing