Search

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of fractional flow reserve (FFR)–guided revascularization compared with culprit-only percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) on infarct size, left ventricular (LV), function, LV remodeling, and the presence of nonculprit infarctions. Background: Patients with STEMI with multivessel disease might have improved clinical outcomes after complete revascularization compared with PCI of the infarct-related artery only, but the impact on infarct size, LV function, and remodeling as well as the risk for periprocedural infarction are unknown. Methods: In this substudy of the DANAMI-3 (Third Danish Trial in Acute Myocardial Infarction)–PRIMULTI (Primary PCI in Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction and Multivessel Disease: Treatment of Culprit Lesion Only or Complete Revascularization) randomized trial, patients with STEMI with multivessel disease were randomized to receive either complete FFR-guided revascularization or PCI of the culprit vessel only. The patients underwent cardiac magnetic resonance imaging during index admission and at 3-month follow-up. Results: A total of 280 patients (136 patients with infarct-related and 144 with complete FFR-guided revascularization) were included. There were no differences in final infarct size (median 12% [interquartile range: 5% to 19%] vs. 11% [interquartile range: 4% to 18%]; p = 0.62), myocardial salvage index (median 0.71 [interquartile range: 0.54 to 0.89] vs. 0.66 [interquartile range: 0.55 to 0.87]; p = 0.49), LV ejection fraction (mean 58 ± 9% vs. 59 ± 9%; p = 0.39), and LV end-systolic volume remodeling (mean 7 ± 22 ml vs. 7 ± 19 ml; p = 0.63). New nonculprit infarction occurring after the nonculprit intervention was numerically more frequent among patients treated with complete revascularization (6 [4.5%] vs. 1 [0.8%]; p = 0.12). Conclusions: Complete FFR-guided revascularization in patients with STEMI and multivessel disease did not affect final infarct size, LV function, or remodeling compared with culprit-only PCI.

Importance: Ischemic postconditioning of the heart during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) induced by repetitive interruptions of blood flow to the ischemic myocardial region immediately after reopening of the infarct-related artery may limit myocardial damage.Objective: To determine whether ischemic postconditioning can improve the clinical outcomes in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).Design, Setting, And Participants: In this multicenter, randomized clinical trial, patients with onset of symptoms within 12 hours, STEMI, and thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) grade 0-1 flow in the infarct-related artery at arrival were randomized to conventional PCI or postconditioning. Inclusion began on March 21, 2011, through February 2, 2014, and follow-up was completed on February 2, 2016. Analysis was based on intention to treat.Interventions: Patients were randomly allocated 1:1 to conventional primary PCI, including stent implantation, or postconditioning performed as 4 repeated 30-second balloon occlusions followed by 30 seconds of reperfusion immediately after opening of the infarct-related artery and before stent implantation.Main Outcome and Measures: A combination of all-cause death and hospitalization for heart failure.Results: During the inclusion period, 1234 patients (975 men [79.0%] and 259 women [21.0%]; mean [SD] age, 62 [11] years) underwent randomization in the trial. Median follow-up was 38 months (interquartile range, 24-58 months). The primary outcome occurred in 69 patients (11.2%) who underwent conventional primary PCI and in 65 (10.5%) who underwent postconditioning (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.66-1.30; P = .66). The hazard ratios were 0.75 (95% CI, 0.49-1.14; P = .18) for all-cause death and 0.99 (95% CI, 0.60-1.64; P = .96) for heart failure.Conclusions and Relevance: Routine ischemic postconditioning during primary PCI failed to reduce the composite outcome of death from any cause and hospitalization for heart failure in patients with STEMI and TIMI grade 0-1 flow at arrival.Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01435408.

Hyperglycemia upon admission in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients occurs frequently and is associated with adverse outcome. It is however unsettled whether elevated blood glucose is the cause or consequence of increased myocardial damage. In addition, whether the cardioprotective effect of exenatide, a glucose-lowering drug, is dependent on hyperglycemia remains unknown. The objectives of this sub-study were to evaluate the association between hyperglycemia and infarct size, myocardial salvage and area-at-risk, and to assess the interaction between exenatide and hyperglycemia. A total of 210 STEMI patients were randomized to receive intravenous exenatide or placebo before percutaneous coronary intervention. Hyperglycemia was associated with larger area-at-risk and infarct size compared to patients with normoglycemia, but the salvage index and infarct size adjusting for area-at-risk did not differ between the groups. Treatment with exenatide resulted in increased salvage index both among patients with normoglycemia and hyperglycemia. Thus, we conclude that the association between hyperglycemia upon admission and infarct size in STEMI patients is a consequence of a larger myocardial area-at-risk but not on a reduction in myocardial salvage. Also, cardioprotection by exenatide treatment is independent of admission glucose levels. Thus, hyperglycemia does not influence the effect of the reperfusion treatment but rather represents a surrogate marker for the severity of myocardium at risk and injury.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to compare the long-term effects of drug-eluting stent (DES) compared with bare-metal stent (BMS) implantation in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention. BACKGROUND: The randomized DEDICATION (Drug Elution and Distal Protection in Acute Myocardial Infarction) trial evaluated the outcome after DES compared with BMS implantation in patients with STEMI undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS: Patients with a high-grade stenosis/occlusion of a native coronary artery presenting with symptoms

Udgivelsesdato: 2010-Aug-17 OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to compare long-term clinical outcomes after implantation of drug-eluting stents (DES) and bare-metal stents (BMS) in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). BACKGROUND: The evidence of long-term efficacy and safety after implantation of DES in patients with complex lesions is scarce. METHODS: We randomly assigned 626 patients with STEMI referred within 12 h to have a DES or a BMS implanted in the infarct-related lesion with or without distal protection during primary percutaneous coronary intervention. RESULTS: At 3 years, target lesion revascularization was 6.1% in the DES group compared with 16.3% in the BMS group (p

ObjectivesThis study sought to compare the long-term effects of drug-eluting stent (DES) compared with bare-metal stent (BMS) implantation in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention.BackgroundThe randomized DEDICATION (Drug Elution and Distal Protection in Acute Myocardial Infarction) trial evaluated the outcome after DES compared with BMS implantation in patients with STEMI undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention.MethodsPatients with a high-grade stenosis/occlusion of a native coronary artery presenting with symptoms

ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the use of distal protection during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in native coronary vessels.BackgroundEmbolization of material from the infarct-related lesion during PCI may result in impaired myocardial perfusion and worsen the prognosis. Previous attempts to protect the microcirculation during primary PCI have had conflicting results.MethodsWe randomly assigned 626 patients with STEMI referred within 12 h to have PCI performed with (n = 312) or without (n = 314) distal protection. The primary end point was complete (≥70%) ST-segment resolution detected by continuous ST-segment monitoring. Blood levels of troponin-T and creatine kinase-MB were monitored before and after the procedure, and echocardiographic determination of the left ventricular wall motion index (WMI) was performed before discharge.ResultsPatients were well matched in terms of demographic and angiographic baseline characteristics. There was no significant difference in the occurrence of the primary end point (76% vs. 72%, p = 0.29), no difference in maximum troponin-T (4.8 μg/l and 5.0 μg/l, p = 0.87) or maximum creatine kinase-MB (185 μg/l and 184 μg/l, p = 0.99), and no difference in median WMI (1.70 vs. 1.70, p = 0.35). The rate of major adverse cardiac and cerebral events (MACCE) 1 month after PCI was 5.4% with distal protection and 3.2% with conventional treatment (p = 0.17).ConclusionsThe routine use of distal protection by a filterwire system during primary PCI does not seem to improve microvascular perfusion, limit infarct size, or reduce the occurrence of MACCE (Drug Elution and Distal Protection During Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction; NCT00192868).