Why the study?
Is primary stenting with high-pressure deployment and dual antiplatelet therapy safe and feasible in patients with acute myocardial infarction?
Is primary stenting with high-pressure deployment and dual antiplatelet therapy safe and feasible in patients with acute myocardial infarction?
Primary stenting in acute myocardial infarction is safe and feasible, but the occurrence of the slow-flow phenomenon identifies a high-risk subgroup with worse left ventricular function and higher short-term mortality.
Persistent slow flow after stenting in AMI identifies high-risk patients with worse LVEF and mortality; supports stratification but leaves open targeted interventions.
Primary coronary stenting is being increasingly used in patients undergoing primary coronary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction. In this prospective study we evaluated our experience of direct angioplasty in 68 patients with acute myocardial infarction of whom 57 received intracoronary stents using high-pressure deployment (> or =12 atmospheres) with adjunct aspirin and ticlopidine therapy without coumadin. All patients underwent pre-discharge follow-up angiography. Stent implantation was successful in all patients. Stent thrombosis was not seen in any patient. However, TIMI grade 3 flow was obtained in only 51 patients (89.6%) with evidence of slow flow present in remaining six patients. Follow-up angiograms showed no stent thrombosis but five out of the six patients (83%) with slow-flow phenomenon persisted to have slow flow. These patients had lower left ventricular ejection fraction as compared to patients with TIMI 3 flow at follow-up angiography (27.5 +/- 10.2% vs. 42.1 +/- 15.2%, P < .001) and a high mortality (two out of six) within 30 days. Primary stenting is safe and feasible in the majority of patients with good short-term outcomes, but persistent slow-flow phenomenon with adverse clinical outcome is seen in a small but significant number of patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kaul et al. (1999) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: