Key result
Sirolimus-eluting stents linked to impaired coronary blood flow recovery versus bare metal stents post-AMI.
Why the study?
Sirolimus-eluting stent implantation aggravates endothelial vasomotor dysfunction in infarct-related coronary arteries after acute myocardial infarction, but the duration of this effect and impact on left ventricular dysfunction were unclear.
Does sirolimus-eluting stent implantation compared to bare metal stents delay recovery of endothelial vasomotor dysfunction and left ventricular regional dysfunction in patients with acute myocardial infarction?
Cohort (n=33)
Does sirolimus-eluting stent implantation compared to bare metal stents delay recovery of endothelial vasomotor dysfunction and left ventricular regional dysfunction in patients with acute myocardial infarction?
Absolute Event Rate: 77% vs 116%
p-value: p=<0.01
Sirolimus-eluting stents may impair the recovery of endothelial vasomotor function and regional left ventricular wall motion compared to bare metal stents at 6 months post-AMI.
SES associated with impaired endothelial and LV recovery vs BMS at 6 months post-AMI; leaves open impact on outcomes or stent selection.
BACKGROUND: Sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) implantation aggravated endothelial vasomotor dysfunction in infarct-related coronary arteries. METHODS AND RESULTS: This study examined the effect of SES implantation on the duration of reperfusion-induced endothelial vasomotor dysfunction in infarct-related coronary arteries and on postinfarct left ventricular dysfunction in acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Patients with a first AMI due to occlusion of the left anterior descending coronary artery and successful reperfusion using SES (n=15) or bare metal stents (BMS; n=18) were examined. The vasomotor response of the left anterior descending coronary artery to acetylcholine and left ventriculography were examined 2 weeks and 6 months after AMI. At 6 months after AMI, the impairment of epicardial coronary artery dilation and coronary blood flow increase in response to acetylcholine was recovered from 2 weeks after AMI in BMS-treated patients, whereas the responses of SES-treated patients improved but remained impaired compared with BMS-treated patients (% increase in blood flow, 77+/-12% in SES versus 116+/-15% in BMS at 10 microg/min of acetylcholine, P<0.01). Left ventricular regional wall dysfunction in the left anterior descending coronary artery territory improved from 2 weeks to 6 months after AMI in BMS-treated patients but not in SES-treated patients (% improvement of average SD/chord, 6% in SES versus 19% in BMS, P<0.05), although left ventricular global ejection fraction was similar between the groups at any time points. CONCLUSIONS: SES implantation may delay recovery of reperfusion-induced endothelial vasomotor dysfunction in infarct-related coronary arteries and left ventricular regional dysfunction for at least 6 months after AMI.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Obata et al. (2009) conducted a cohort in Acute Myocardial Infarction (n=33). Sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) vs. Bare metal stents (BMS) was evaluated on Percentage increase in blood flow in response to acetylcholine at 6 months (p=<0.01). Sirolimus-eluting stents impaired recovery of coronary blood flow in response to acetylcholine at 6 months post-AMI compared to bare metal stents (77% vs 116% increase, P<0.01).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: