It is known that a low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) is more effective than unfractionated heparin in unstable angina/non-Q-wave myocardial infarction (UA/NQMI) and the platelet GPIIb/IIIa receptors play an important role in acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Therefore, enoxaparin might have a similar advantage over heparin when used with a GPIIb/IIIa antagonist (RPR109891) in coronary thrombolysis. After induction of coronary thrombosis in anesthetized dogs, infusion of saline, enoxaparin, heparin, RPR109891, enoxaparin+RPR109891, or heparin+RPR109891 was initiated followed 15 min later by recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (rt-PA). The incidence of reperfusion in the enoxaparin+RPR109891- and the heparin+RPR109891-treated groups was similar, but time to reperfusion tended to be shorter for enoxaparin versus heparin. Only 43% of the vessels reoccluded in the enoxaparin+RPR109891 group, compared to 100% vessels in the heparin+RPR109891 group. Enoxaparin+RPR109891 maintained flow for a significantly longer time compared to saline, enoxaparin, heparin, and heparin+RPR109891. Enoxaparin+RPR109891 and heparin+RPR109891 increased the template bleeding time by 2- and 3-fold and activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) by 1.3- and 3-fold, respectively. These data suggest that enoxaparin is more effective and potentially safer than heparin when combined with a GPIIb/IIIa receptor antagonist during rt-PA-induced coronary thrombolysis.