Back to Search Start Over

Deferred versus conventional stent implantation in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (DANAMI 3-DEFER): an open-label, randomised controlled trial.

Authors :
Kelbæk, Henning
Høfsten, Dan Eik
Køber, Lars
Helqvist, Steffen
Kløvgaard, Lene
Holmvang, Lene
Jørgensen, Erik
Pedersen, Frants
Saunamäki, Kari
De Backer, Ole
Bang, Lia E.
Kofoed, Klaus F.
Lønborg, Jacob
Ahtarovski, Kiril
Vejlstrup, Niels
Bøtker, Hans E.
Terkelsen, Christian J.
Christiansen, Evald H.
Ravkilde, Jan
Tilsted, Hans-Henrik
Source :
Lancet. 5/28/2016, Vol. 387 Issue 10034, p2199-2206. 8p.
Publication Year :
2016

Abstract

<bold>Background: </bold>Despite successful treatment of the culprit artery lesion by primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with stent implantation, thrombotic embolisation occurs in some cases, which impairs the prognosis of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). We aimed to assess the clinical outcomes of deferred stent implantation versus standard PCI in patients with STEMI.<bold>Methods: </bold>We did this open-label, randomised controlled trial at four primary PCI centres in Denmark. Eligible patients (aged >18 years) had acute onset symptoms lasting 12 h or less, and ST-segment elevation of 0·1 mV or more in at least two or more contiguous electrocardiographic leads or newly developed left bundle branch block. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1), via an electronic web-based system with permuted block sizes of two to six, to receive either standard primary PCI with immediate stent implantation or deferred stent implantation 48 h after the index procedure if a stabilised flow could be obtained in the infarct-related artery. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause mortality, hospital admission for heart failure, recurrent infarction, and any unplanned revascularisation of the target vessel within 2 years' follow-up. Patients, investigators, and treating clinicians were not masked to treatment allocation. We did analysis by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01435408.<bold>Findings: </bold>Between March 1, 2011, and Feb 28, 2014, we randomly assigned 1215 patients to receive either standard PCI (n=612) or deferred stent implantation (n=603). Median follow-up time was 42 months (IQR 33-49). Events comprising the primary endpoint occurred in 109 (18%) patients who had standard PCI and in 105 (17%) patients who had deferred stent implantation (hazard ratio 0·99, 95% CI 0·76-1·29; p=0·92). Procedure-related myocardial infarction, bleeding requiring transfusion or surgery, contrast-induced nephopathy, or stroke occurred in 28 (5%) patients in the conventional PCI group versus 27 (4%) patients in the deferred stent implantation group, with no significant differences between groups.<bold>Interpretation: </bold>In patients with STEMI, routine deferred stent implantation did not reduce the occurrence of death, heart failure, myocardial infarction, or repeat revascularisation compared with conventional PCI. Results from ongoing randomised trials might shed further light on the concept of deferred stenting in this patient population.<bold>Funding: </bold>Danish Agency for Science, Technology and Innovation, and Danish Council for Strategic Research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
01406736
Volume :
387
Issue :
10034
Database :
Academic Search Index
Journal :
Lancet
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
115732314
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)30072-1