Key result
Direct stenting without predilatation shows no benefit over conventional stenting for post-PPCI microcirculatory resistance.
Why the study?
Whether direct stenting without predilatation during primary PCI reduces microvascular dysfunction in STEMI patients was unclear.
Does direct stenting without predilatation reduce microvascular dysfunction (measured by IMR) in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention?
RCT (n=72)
randomly assigned
Does direct stenting without predilatation reduce microvascular dysfunction (measured by IMR) in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention?
In a pilot RCT of STEMI patients, direct stenting did not significantly improve microvascular reperfusion parameters compared to conventional stenting, though results were limited by missing data.
Direct stenting showed no IMR benefit in this pilot; leaves open efficacy in larger STEMI trials before practice change.
OBJECTIVE: Whether direct stenting (DS) without predilatation during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) reduces microvascular dysfunction in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction is unclear. We performed a randomized study to assess the effect of DS on microvascular reperfusion. METHODS: Seventy-two patients undergoing PPCI were randomly assigned to the DS or conventional stenting (CS) with predilatation groups. The primary endpoint was the post-PPCI index of microcirculatory resistance (IMR). We compared thrombolysis in myocardial infarction myocardial perfusion (TMP) grades, ST-segment resolution, and long-term clinical outcomes between the groups. RESULTS: Microvascular reperfusion parameters immediately after PPCI (e.g., the IMR, TMP grade, and ST-segment resolution) were not different between the groups. However, significantly fewer patients in the DS group had the IMR measured because of no-reflow or cardiogenic shock during PPCI than those in the CS group. No differences were found in left ventricular functional recovery or clinical outcomes between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: This trial showed no effect of DS on the IMR. However, our finding should be interpreted with caution because the number of patients who could not have the IMR measured was higher in the CS group than in the DS group. A larger randomized trial is required (Research Registry number: 8079).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kim et al. (2022) conducted an RCT in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (n=72). Direct stenting (DS) without predilatation vs. Conventional stenting (CS) with predilatation was evaluated on post-PPCI index of microcirculatory resistance (IMR). Direct stenting without predilatation during primary PCI showed no significant difference in post-PPCI index of microcirculatory resistance compared to conventional stenting.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: