Key result
MAGSTEMI trial compares magnesium bioresorbable scaffolds versus sirolimus-eluting stents for 12-month vasomotion in STEMI.
Why the study?
Does a magnesium-based bioresorbable scaffold improve in-stent/scaffold vasomotion compared to a sirolimus eluting stent in STEMI patients treated by primary PCI?
RCT (n=148)
Single-blind
1:1
Yes
Does a magnesium-based bioresorbable scaffold improve in-stent/scaffold vasomotion compared to a sirolimus eluting stent in STEMI patients treated by primary PCI?
The MAGSTEMI trial is designed to evaluate whether a magnesium-based bioresorbable scaffold improves vasomotor function compared to a metallic sirolimus-eluting stent in patients with STEMI undergoing primary PCI.
AIM: Use of a Bioresorbable Scaffolds (BRS) either in clinical practice or in the setting of an acute myocardial infarction (MI) is controversial. Despite an overall high rate of thrombosis, vascular healing response following BRS implantation tend to superiority as compared to metallic drug-eluting stent in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients. We sought to compare the in-stent/scaffold vasomotion between metallic BRS and sirolimus eluting stent (SES) at 12-month angiographic follow-up in the setting of patients with STEMI treated by primary PCI. STUDY DESIGN: This is an investigator-driven, prospective, multicenter, randomized, single blind, two-arm, controlled trial (ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT03234348). This trial will randomize ~148 patients 1:1 to SES or BRS. Primary end-point is the in-stent/scaffold change in mean lumen diameter after nitroglycerin administration at 12-month angiographic follow-up. Besides, patient-oriented combined endpoint of all-cause death, any MI, and any revascularization, together with scaffold/stent thrombosis rate and device-oriented endpoint of cardiac death, target vessel (TV)-MI and TVR at 1 year will be also evaluated. Clinical follow-up will be scheduled yearly up to 5 years. CONCLUSION: This trial will shed light on the vascular vasomotion following BRS implantation in the complex scenario of STEMI.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Brugaletta et al. (2018) conducted an RCT in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) (n=148). Magnesium-based bioresorbable scaffold (BRS) vs. Sirolimus eluting stent (SES) was evaluated on In-stent/scaffold change in mean lumen diameter after nitroglycerin administration at 12-month angiographic follow-up. The MAGSTEMI trial will randomize approximately 148 STEMI patients to a magnesium-based bioresorbable scaffold or a sirolimus-eluting stent to evaluate 12-month vasomotion.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: