Search

Objectives: To investigate the safety and clinical efficacy of tirofiban during primary percutaneous coronary interventions (pPCI)., Background: Gp IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPI) use during pPCI has declined over years, mainly for the increased hemorrhagic risk associated to their use and for the availability of potent, fast-acting oral antiplatelet drugs. However, several pharmacodynamic studies showed suboptimal platelet inhibition with P2Y12-blockers, such as prasugrel or ticagrelor., Methods: Patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing pPCI were prospectively enrolled in a multicenter registry conducted in high-volume centers in Italy. All patients received intraprocedural tirofiban. The primary safety endpoint was the occurrence of in-hospital bleedings according to the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium definition. In-hospital major adverse coronary events (MACE, defined as death, reinfarction, stent thrombosis, and target vessel revascularization), final TIMI flow, myocardial blush grade, and ST-segment resolution were also evaluated., Results: A total of 472 patients (mean age 61 ± 11 years, 83% males) were enrolled in 16 Italian centers from October 2015 to June 2018. Mean basal thrombus grade score was 3.47 ± 1.25. PCI was performed by transradial approach in 88% of patients. We observed a very low rate of 30 days BARC bleedings (2.1%) and MACE (0.8%). Complete (>70%) ST-segment resolution was observed in 67% of patients., Conclusions: In the FASTER registry, the use of tirofiban during primary PCI, performed with a transradial approach in most cases, in patients with high thrombus burden was associated with high rates of complete ST-segment resolution and low rates of in-hospital bleeding and MACE., Competing Interests: The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Stefano Rigattieri et al.)

Objectives: Several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) consistently reported better clinical outcomes with radial as compared to femoral access for primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Nevertheless, heterogeneous use of potent antiplatelet drugs, such as Gp IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPI), across different studies could have biased the results in favor of radial access. We performed an updated meta-analysis and meta-regression of RCTs in order to appraise whether the use of GPI had an impact on pooled estimates of clinical outcomes according to vascular access., Methods: We computed pooled estimates by the random-effects model for the following outcomes: mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events (death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and target vessel revascularization), and major bleedings. Additionally, we performed meta-regression analysis to investigate the impact of GPI use on pooled estimates of clinical outcomes., Results: We analyzed 14 randomized controlled trials and 11090 patients who were treated by radial (5497) and femoral access (5593), respectively. Radial access was associated with better outcomes for mortality (risk difference 0.01 (0.00, 0.01), p =0.03), MACE (risk difference 0.01 (0.00, 0.02), p =0.003), and major bleedings (risk difference 0.01 (0.00, 0.02), p =0.02). At meta-regression, we observed a significant correlation of mortality with both GPI use ( p =0.011) and year of publication ( p =0.0073), whereas no correlation was observed with major bleedings., Conclusions: In this meta-analysis, the use of radial access for primary PCI was associated with better clinical outcomes as compared to femoral access. However, the effect size on mortality was modulated by GPI rate, with greater benefit of radial access in studies with larger use of these drugs., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Stefano Rigattieri et al.)

Background: Optimal treatment strategy of patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) undergoing primary angioplasty is still unclear. Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of non-culprit vessels simultaneously or soon after primary angioplasty is feasible and safe, but available data failed to consistently show a benefit in long-term clinical outcomes., Methods: We retrospectively compared in-hospital and long-term outcomes for patients with STEMI and multivessel CAD treated by primary angioplasty with (Group 1, n=64) or without (Group 2, n=46) early, staged PCI of other angiographically significant coronary lesions. In-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) were defined as a composite of death, periprocedural myocardial infarction after staged, elective PCI, stroke, stent thrombosis, major bleeding, and vascular complications. MACE at follow-up were defined as a composite of death, stroke, stent thrombosis, any coronary revascularization, and re-hospitalization for acute coronary syndrome., Results: Group 1 patients underwent staged PCI 5.9 +/- 3.5 days after primary angioplasty. The mean length of follow-up was 13 months (392 +/- 236 days). The incidence of in-hospital MACE was 20.3% in Group 1 and 10.8% in Group 2 (P=0.186); the incidence of out of hospital MACE was 9.3% in Group 1 and 23.9% in Group 2 (P=0.037). In Group 1 in-hospital MACE were driven by periprocedural myocardial infarction after the elective procedure, which occurred in 15.6% of patients., Conclusions: Our data show that multivessel, staged PCI in STEMI patients is associated with a low incidence of adverse events at follow-up but with a higher incidence of in-hospital MACE, mainly driven by periprocedural myocardial infarction during the elective procedure.