Key result
Transluminal recanalization in acute myocardial infarction significantly reduced the length of the akinetic segment compared to conventional treatment (73.2 vs 144.9 mm, p<0.0025).
Why the study?
Does transluminal recanalization improve left ventricular function in patients with acute myocardial infarction compared to conventional treatment?
Population
16 patients with acute myocardial infarction and occlusion of the infarct-related vessel in the acute stage.
Comparison
Transluminal recanalization of the… vs Conventional treatment.
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
8 days to 7 months
Authors
Loading...
Does not support practice change in AMI; leaves open LV function benefits pending randomized confirmation.
Cohort (n=16)
Does transluminal recanalization improve left ventricular function in patients with acute myocardial infarction compared to conventional treatment?
Absolute Event Rate: 73.2% vs 144.9%
p-value: p=<0.0025
Transluminal recanalization in the early phases of acute myocardial infarction may limit myocardial injury and improve left ventricular function compared to conventional treatment.
Rentrop et al. (1979) conducted a cohort in Acute myocardial infarction (n=16). Transluminal recanalization by catheter techniques vs. Conventional treatment was evaluated on Length of the akinetic segment (AKS) in the chronic stage (mm) (p=<0.0025). Transluminal recanalization in acute myocardial infarction significantly reduced the length of the akinetic segment compared to conventional treatment (73.2 vs 144.9 mm, p<0.0025).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: