Key result
Thrombus-rich lesions predicted a higher incidence of no-reflow compared to hard plaque lesions (38% vs 0%, p=0.006) in patients with acute myocardial infarction.
Why the study?
Does primary angioplasty compared to intracoronary thrombolysis affect the incidence of no-reflow and left ventricular function in patients with acute myocardial infarction based on lesion morphology?
RCT (n=76)
randomly assigned
Does primary angioplasty compared to intracoronary thrombolysis affect the incidence of no-reflow and left ventricular function in patients with acute myocardial infarction based on lesion morphology?
Thrombus-rich lesions predict no-reflow during primary angioplasty in acute myocardial infarction, suggesting intracoronary thrombolysis may be preferable for these specific lesions, whereas angioplasty is more effective for hard plaque lesions.
Thrombus-rich lesions may favor intracoronary thrombolysis over angioplasty in AMI; extends RCT evidence for morphology-guided reperfusion.
OBJECTIVES: We tried to elucidate angiographical predictors of no-reflow and to determine a preferable recanalization therapy based on the morphology of lesions. METHODS: Seventy-six patients were randomly assigned into groups to receive primary angioplasty (n = 41) or intracoronary thrombolysis (n = 35). Based on angiography, occlusive infarct-related lesions were divided into thrombus-rich and hard plaque lesions. The outcome of the two therapies used for each lesion was compared. RESULTS: The incidence of no-reflow was higher in the thrombus-rich than hard plaque lesions (38 percent vs. 0 percent, p = 0.006); the left ventricular ejection fraction in the chronic phase was lower (46 +/- 6 percent vs. 55 +/- 5 percent, p < 0.001) for primary angioplasty than thrombolysis. No-reflow was not observed in the hard plaque lesions. However, the incidence of additional reperfusion therapy (88 percent vs. 8 percent, p < 0.001) was higher in the patients who underwent thrombolysis rather than primary angioplasty. CONCLUSIONS: We suggest that thrombus-rich lesions in primary angioplasty may predict no-reflow in acute myocardial infarction, and thrombolysis prior to angioplasty may be preferable for these lesions. We also suggest that primary angioplasty may be more effective than thrombolysis for hard plaque lesions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hara et al. (2005) conducted an RCT in Acute Myocardial Infarction (n=76). Primary angioplasty vs. Intracoronary thrombolysis was evaluated on Incidence of no-reflow (thrombus-rich vs hard plaque lesions) (p=0.006). Thrombus-rich lesions predicted a higher incidence of no-reflow compared to hard plaque lesions (38% vs 0%, p=0.006) in patients with acute myocardial infarction.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: