Stent Versus Non-Stent in Treating Intermediate Stenosis Culprit Lesions in Acute ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Patients

To investigate the efficacy and safety of stent versus non-stent in treating acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients with single vessel disease and intermediate stenosis culprit lesions.Between September 2009 and May 2015, 475 acute STEMI patients (time from symptom onset12 hours) with single vessel disease and intermediate stenosis culprit lesions were retrospectively studied at Beijing Anzhen Hospital. The patients were divided into a stent group (n = 308) and non-stent group (n = 167) based on whether they received stent implantation or not during primary coronary angiography.During follow-up, the stent group patients had a lower major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event (MACCE) rate than the non-stent group: 5.5% versus 12.0%; P = 0.01; hazard ratio (HR) 0.35 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.180.69]). The nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI) rate was lower in the stent group (2.9% versus 7.2%, P = 0.03). The cardiac death rate (1.9% versus 3%, P = 0.45) and stroke (0.6% versus 1.8%, P = 0.35) rate were similar between the stent and non-stent groups. The two groups shared similar all cause death rates: 4.9% versus 5.4%, respectively, P = 0.81; HR: 1.23 [95%CI: 0.51-2.99]. The composite ischemia outcome of death/MI/stroke was lower in the stent group (8.1% versus 14.4%, P = 0.02). The stent and non-stent groups had similar repeat revascularization rates (10.1% versus 11.4%, P = 0.67); ischemia driven readmission (19.5% versus 15.0%, P = 0.27), and bleeding (1.3% versus 1.2%, P = 1) rates.Stent implantation has a better efficacy and safety in reducing adverse ischemia events in acute STEMI patients with single vessel disease and intermediate stenosis culprit lesions.