{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.038461538461538464, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0225752508361204, 'mean_word_length': 5.138461538461539, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 1, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 1, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[Therapeutic assessment between the thrombolysis in 6 hours and delayed thrombolysis after onset of acute myocardial infarction].

OBJECTIVE
To explore the effect of different starting time of thrombolysis on acute myocardial infarction (AMI).


METHODS
Ninety-five patients of AMI were divided into prompt thrombolysis group (less then 6 h, 46 patients) and delayed thrombolysis group (6-12 hours, 49 patients), according to the different starting time of treating AMI. The incidences of reopening and side-effect, as well as mortality were compared between two groups.


RESULTS
The reopening rate and mortality in prompt thrombolysis group were 76% and 4%, respectively. The reopening rate and mortality in delayed thrombolysis group were 49% and 12%, respectively. Compared the prompt thrombolysis group with the delayed thrombolysis group, there was a significance discrepancy (both P<0.01). The side-effect rate had not significant discrepancy (15% vs. 16%, P>0.05).


CONCLUSION
The clinical reopening rate of the thrombolysis is higher in patients with thrombolysis less than 6 hours, the mortality is lower. The thrombolytic treatment should be prompt for patients adapting thrombolysis.