The MGuard Prime Embolic Protection Stent demonstrated high procedural success and low 30-day MACE rates in a real-world cohort of STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May support MGuard feasibility in real-world STEMI PCI; leaves open efficacy versus standard stents in RCTs.
AIMS: We sought to evaluate the procedural and clinical performances of the MGuard Prime Embolic Protection Stent (EPS) in a "real-world" population with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI). METHODS AND RESULTS: Consecutive STEMI patients meeting the inclusion criteria and undergoing PPCI were enrolled. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at 30 days, defined as the composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (Q wave and non-Q wave) or target lesion revascularization (PCI or coronary artery bypass graft). Secondary endpoints included device success, lesion success, and postprocedural reperfusion outcomes: thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow and ST-segment elevation resolution (STR). A total of 97 patients (62 years, 77% men) were included. Symptom to cathlab time was 238 min. Device and lesion success were 100%. Final TIMI-3 flow was achieved in 91.8%, and STR > 50% in 87% of the patients. MACE at 30 days was 2.2%, which consisted of one case each of target vessel (TV)-myocardial infarction (MI), and non-TV-MI. CONCLUSIONS: The use of the MGuard Prime EPS stent is feasible and safe and could be also effective in achieving myocardial reperfusion in STEMI patients undergoing PPCI.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Amoroso et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: