[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 54.146.184.210. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Article
March 25, 1983

Emergency Revascularization-Reply

Author Affiliations

Des Moines

JAMA. 1983;249(12):1564. doi:10.1001/jama.1983.03330360017012

This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.

Abstract

In Reply.—  From 1975, until the advent of streptokinase and percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty, our only means for coronary reperfusion during evolving MI was direct revascularization. Since the advent of streptokinase and percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty, alternate means have become available. If these alternate means are successful—and in our experience they have been in a large percentage of the cases—then we see no need to invade the patients surgically, as suggested by Dr Reid in his letter. We also state unequivocally in our manuscript that if adequate reperfusion by nonsurgical means is unsuccessful (single-vessel disease) with streptokinase alone or combined with percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty, then immediate surgery is carried out. We certainly agree with Dr Reid that single coronary artery occlusion can be catastrophically fatal, and either our article did not state it strongly enough or he misread the fact that reperfusion is our therapeutic end point and goal.

×