Why the study?
What are the clinical, angiographic, and procedural predictors of no-reflow in patients with acute myocardial infarction undergoing primary PCI?
What are the clinical, angiographic, and procedural predictors of no-reflow in patients with acute myocardial infarction undergoing primary PCI?
Time to reperfusion, initial TIMI flow, thrombus burden, lesion length, and vessel diameter are independent predictors of no-reflow during primary PCI for acute myocardial infarction.
Predictor identification may aid no-reflow risk stratification in primary PCI; leaves open validation in larger prospective studies.
Background: Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is the preferred method of ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction (STEMI) management but no-reflow phenomenon is one of its major complications that affects patient's outcome. Objective: Identification of possible clinical, angiographic and procedural predictors for no-reflow in patients with AMI after primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Methods: A total of hundred patients with AMI who had been treated by primary PCI at the National heart institute (NHI) and cardiology department, Menoufia University hospital were enrolled in this study, according to thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow grade, patients were divided into a reflow group (TIMI 3) and a no-reflow group (TIMI ≤ 2). The clinical, angiographic and procedural data were compared between both groups. Discussion: Sixteen patients (16%) developed no-reflow phenomenon after primary PCI. Statistical analysis showed that time from onset to reperfusion, low initial TIMI flow grade, high thrombus burden, long lesion length and large reference luminal diameter were correlated with no-reflow (P < 0.05 for all) and were considered to be independent predictors of no-reflow. Conclusion: The occurrence of no-reflow after primary PCI for acute myocardial infarction can be predicted by certain clinical, angiographic and procedural features.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mohammed Ismail Ali (2018) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: