Key result
Acolysis reduces procedural success by ~26% versus abciximab during SVG PCI in ACS.
Why the study?
Percutaneous coronary interventions in saphenous vein grafts with thrombus have a high frequency of distal embolization, and the benefit of therapeutic ultrasound during these interventions is unknown.
Does acolysis (therapeutic ultrasound) improve procedural success compared to abciximab in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing PCI in saphenous vein grafts?
RCT (n=181)
Does acolysis (therapeutic ultrasound) improve procedural success compared to abciximab in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing PCI in saphenous vein grafts?
Absolute Event Rate: 53.8% vs 73.1%
p-value: p=0.014
Use of therapeutic ultrasound (acolysis) in saphenous vein graft lesions during PCI for acute coronary syndrome is inferior to abciximab, leading to poorer angiographic outcomes and increased ischemic complications.
Acolysis should not be used in saphenous vein graft PCI for ACS; challenges ultrasound facilitation and reinforces abciximab preference.
BACKGROUND: Percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) in saphenous vein grafts (SVGs) with thrombus have a high frequency of distal embolization. Acolysis (therapeutic ultrasound) can break up thrombus in vitro in animal models and humans. Whether this is beneficial during percutaneous SVG interventions is unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a trial of coronary ultrasound thrombolysis in which patients with an acute coronary syndrome undergoing PCI in SVGs were randomly assigned to receive acolysis or abciximab. The primary end point was a successful procedure, defined as final luminal diameter stenosis 30% or less with Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction grade 3 flow and freedom from major adverse cardiac events (composite of death, Q-wave, and non-Q-wave myocardial infarction [MI], emergency bypass procedure, disabling stroke, and target lesion revascularization). Of 181 enrolled, 92 received acolysis and 89 abciximab. Angiographic procedural success was achieved in 63% of acolysis patients and 82% of abciximab patients (P=0.008). Incidence of major adverse cardiac events at 30 days was 25% with acolysis and 12% with abciximab (P=0.036), attributable mainly to a greater frequency of non-Q-wave MI with acolysis (19.6% versus 7.9%, P=0.03). The incidence of Q-wave MI was also higher with acolysis (5.4% versus 2.2%, P=nonsignificant). The primary end point was achieved in 53.8% of acolysis patients and 73.1% of abciximab patients (P=0.014). CONCLUSIONS: Use of therapeutic ultrasound in vein graft lesions in patients with acute coronary syndrome had poor angiographic outcome and increased the incidence of acute ischemic complications.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Singh et al. (2003) conducted an RCT in Acute coronary syndrome undergoing PCI in saphenous vein grafts (n=181). Acolysis (therapeutic ultrasound) vs. Abciximab was evaluated on Successful procedure, defined as final luminal diameter stenosis 30% or less with Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction grade 3 flow and freedom from major adverse cardiac events (p=0.014). Acolysis resulted in a lower rate of procedural success compared to abciximab (53.8% vs 73.1%, P=0.014) in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing PCI in saphenous vein grafts.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: