Why the study?
Slow flow/no-reflow undermines reperfusion during primary PCI for STEMI, and identifying at-risk patients before device escalation may enable protocolized microvascular-protection strategies.
What are the predictors of slow flow/no-reflow during primary PCI for STEMI, and does it worsen in-hospital outcomes?
What are the predictors of slow flow/no-reflow during primary PCI for STEMI, and does it worsen in-hospital outcomes?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Slow flow/no-reflow complicates nearly 30% of primary PCIs for STEMI and is strongly predicted by diabetes, high thrombus burden, and absent pre-PCI flow, leading to significantly worse in-hospital clinical outcomes.
Background Slow flow/no-reflow (SF/NR) can undermine effective reperfusion during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Identifying patients at risk before device escalation may enable protocolized microvascular-protection strategies within STEMI systems of care. Objective This study aimed to determine the prevalence of SF/NR in STEMI treated with primary PCI, identify pre-PCI predictors, and assess short-term in-hospital outcomes associated with SF/NR. Methods In a prospective cohort at a high-volume tertiary center, we enrolled 226 consecutive STEMI patients treated between January 1, 2024, and December 31, 2024 (complete-case analysis). SF/NR was defined as final thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow <3 in the absence of mechanical obstruction. Multivariable logistic regression estimated independent predictors (adjusted odds ratios (aORs) with 95% CIs). Discrimination was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) with bootstrap optimism correction. In-hospital outcomes included final TIMI 3 flow, ventricular arrhythmia, hemodynamic instability, heart failure, and death. Results SF/NR occurred in 65/226 patients (28.8%). Independent predictors were diabetes mellitus (aOR, 2.05; 95% CI, 1.07-3.91), TIMI thrombus grade 5 (aOR, 3.02; 95% CI, 1.55-5.87), and pre-PCI TIMI 0 flow (aOR, 3.85; 95% CI, 1.53-9.67); symptom-to-balloon time >6 h was not an independent predictor. Model discrimination was fair (AUC, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.67-0.81; optimism-corrected AUC, 0.73). Compared with patients without SF/NR, those with SF/NR had lower final TIMI 3 flow (43.1% vs 82.0%; difference, -38.9 percentage points; 95% CI, -51.0 to -26.8) and higher rates of ventricular arrhythmia (18.5% vs 5.6%; P = 0.004), hemodynamic instability (24.6% vs 8.6%; P = 0.002), heart failure (21.5% vs 9.3%; P = 0.01), and in-hospital mortality (7.7% vs 1.9%; P = 0.04). Conclusions In contemporary primary PCI for STEMI, SF/NR was common and associated more strongly with thrombus burden and absent antegrade flow, along with diabetes, than with delays >6 hours. A simple pre-PCI triad (diabetes, TIMI thrombus grade 5, and TIMI 0 flow) may help flag higher-risk cases and prompt early microvascular-protection measures; external validation is warranted prior to routine adoption.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ayaz et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: