Key result
Preprocedural TIMI flow <3 is not independently linked to higher 30-day ischemic events versus TIMI 3.
Why the study?
Previous studies showed TIMI flow 0/1 prior to primary PCI is associated with poor clinical outcome, but its impact in STEMI patients with rapid reperfusion and modern therapy is unclear.
Does preprocedural TIMI flow <3 predict adverse ischemic events in patients with STEMI undergoing primary PCI with modern therapy?
Cohort (n=1,680)
Does preprocedural TIMI flow <3 predict adverse ischemic events in patients with STEMI undergoing primary PCI with modern therapy?
Odds Ratio: 1.89 (95% CI 0.74–4.85)
In patients with STEMI of <6 hours duration receiving modern rapid reperfusion therapy, preprocedural TIMI flow <3 was not independently associated with a higher rate of adverse ischemic events at 30 days.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Does not support preprocedural TIMI-based ischemic risk prediction in modern STEMI PCI; leaves open validation in larger cohorts.
Bauer et al. (2019) conducted a cohort in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) (n=1,680). Preprocedural TIMI flow <3 vs. Preprocedural TIMI flow 3 was evaluated on Major adverse ischemic events within 30 days (OR 1.89, 95% CI 0.74-4.85). Preprocedural TIMI flow <3 was not independently associated with a higher rate of major adverse ischemic events within 30 days compared to TIMI flow 3 (OR 1.89; 95% CI 0.74-4.85).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: