Comparison of Direct Stenting Versus Conventional Stent Implantation on Blood Flow in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction

As compared with balloon angioplasty, stent implantation in treatment of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) reduces abrupt vessel closure, restenosis, and reocclusion rate. However, a few studies have demonstrated the safety and feasibility of direct stenting compared to conventional stent implantation technique. This study was designed to compare possible advantages of direct stenting with conventional stent implantation on immediate coronary blood flow and short-term clinical benefits in patients with AMI. Fifty patients with AMI who underwent mechanical revascularization were eligible for the study. The patients were randomly assigned to undergo either direct stenting (n = 25) or conventional stent implantation (n = 25). Before and after the procedure thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow and postprocedural corrected TIMI frame count (cTFC) of the infarct-related artery were measured. There was no difference in TIMI flow distribution at baseline between the 2 groups. TIMI 3 flow rate significantly increased after procedure in both groups compared to baseline (p < 0.05). Postprocedural cTFC was found significantly lower in the direct stent arm compared to conventional stenting (p < 0.001). Both during and after the procedure the complication rate and procedural time were lower in the direct stenting arm. Direct stenting provides better immediate coronary blood flow and is a safe and feasible method compared with conventional stenting in patients with AMI. Improvement in coronary blood flow measured by the corrected TIMI frame count method may suggests a significant reduction of microvascular injury.