Dataset Information

Effect of Ischemic Postconditioning During Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

ABSTRACT: Importance:Ischemic postconditioning of the heart during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) induced by repetitive interruptions of blood flow to the ischemic myocardial region immediately after reopening of the infarct-related artery may limit myocardial damage. Objective:To determine whether ischemic postconditioning can improve the clinical outcomes in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Design, Setting, And Participants:In this multicenter, randomized clinical trial, patients with onset of symptoms within 12 hours, STEMI, and thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) grade 0-1 flow in the infarct-related artery at arrival were randomized to conventional PCI or postconditioning. Inclusion began on March 21, 2011, through February 2, 2014, and follow-up was completed on February 2, 2016. Analysis was based on intention to treat. Interventions:Patients were randomly allocated 1:1 to conventional primary PCI, including stent implantation, or postconditioning performed as 4 repeated 30-second balloon occlusions followed by 30 seconds of reperfusion immediately after opening of the infarct-related artery and before stent implantation. Main Outcome and Measures:A combination of all-cause death and hospitalization for heart failure. Results:During the inclusion period, 1234 patients (975 men [79.0%] and 259 women [21.0%]; mean [SD] age, 62 [11] years) underwent randomization in the trial. Median follow-up was 38 months (interquartile range, 24-58 months). The primary outcome occurred in 69 patients (11.2%) who underwent conventional primary PCI and in 65 (10.5%) who underwent postconditioning (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.66-1.30; P?=?.66). The hazard ratios were 0.75 (95% CI, 0.49-1.14; P?=?.18) for all-cause death and 0.99 (95% CI, 0.60-1.64; P?=?.96) for heart failure. Conclusions and Relevance:Routine ischemic postconditioning during primary PCI failed to reduce the composite outcome of death from any cause and hospitalization for heart failure in patients with STEMI and TIMI grade 0-1 flow at arrival. Trial Registration:clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01435408.

SUBMITTER: Engstrom T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5814983 | biostudies-literature | 2017 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effect of Ischemic Postconditioning During Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Engstrøm Thomas T Kelbæk Henning H Helqvist Steffen S Høfsten Dan Eik DE Kløvgaard Lene L Clemmensen Peter P Holmvang Lene L Jørgensen Erik E Pedersen Frants F Saunamaki Kari K Ravkilde Jan J Tilsted Hans-Henrik HH Villadsen Anton A Aarøe Jens J Jensen Svend Eggert SE Raungaard Bent B Bøtker Hans E HE Terkelsen Christian J CJ Maeng Michael M Kaltoft Anne A Krusell Lars R LR Jensen Lisette O LO Veien Karsten T KT Kofoed Klaus Fuglsang KF Torp-Pedersen Christian C Kyhl Kasper K Nepper-Christensen Lars L Treiman Marek M Vejlstrup Niels N Ahtarovski Kiril K Lønborg Jacob J Køber Lars L

JAMA cardiology 20170501 5

<h4>Importance</h4>Ischemic postconditioning of the heart during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) induced by repetitive interruptions of blood flow to the ischemic myocardial region immediately after reopening of the infarct-related artery may limit myocardial damage.<h4>Objective</h4>To determine whether ischemic postconditioning can improve the clinical outcomes in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).<h4>Design, setting, and participants</h4>In this ...[more]

PMID: 28249094

Similar Datasets

Project description:RationalePostconditioning at the time of primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction may reduce infarct size and improve myocardial salvage. However, clinical trials have shown inconsistent benefit.ObjectiveWe performed the first National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute-sponsored trial of postconditioning in the United States using strict enrollment criteria to optimize the early benefits of postconditioning and assess its long-term effects on left ventricular (LV) function.Methods and resultsWe randomized 122 ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients to postconditioning (4, 30 seconds PTCA [percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty] inflations/deflations)+PCI (n=65) versus routine PCI (n=57). All subjects had an occluded major epicardial artery (thrombolysis in myocardial infarction=0) with ischemic times between 1 and 6 hours with no evidence of preinfarction angina or collateral blood flow. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging measured at 2 days post-PCI showed no difference between the postconditioning group and control in regards to infarct size (22.5±14.5 versus 24.0±18.5 g), myocardial salvage index (30.3±15.6% versus 31.5±23.6%), or mean LV ejection fraction. Magnetic resonance imaging at 12 months showed a significant recovery of LV ejection fraction in both groups (61.0±11.4% and 61.4±9.1%; P<0.01). Subjects randomized to postconditioning experienced more favorable remodeling over 1 year (LV end-diastolic volume =157±34 to 150±38 mL) compared with the control group (157±40 to 165±45 mL; P<0.03) and reduced microvascular obstruction ( P=0.05) on baseline magnetic resonance imaging and significantly less adverse LV remodeling compared with control subjects with microvascular obstruction ( P<0.05). No significant adverse events were associated with the postconditioning protocol and all patients but one (hemorrhagic stroke) survived through 1 year of follow-up.ConclusionsWe found no early benefit of postconditioning on infarct size, myocardial salvage index, and LV function compared with routine PCI. However, postconditioning was associated with improved LV remodeling at 1 year of follow-up, especially in subjects with microvascular obstruction.Clinical trial registrationURL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01324453.

Project description:AimsThere are limited contemporary data on the use of initial fibrinolysis in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock (STEMI-CS). This study sought to compare the outcomes of STEMI-CS receiving initial fibrinolysis vs. primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI).MethodsUsing the National (Nationwide) Inpatient Sample from 2009 to 2017, a comparative effectiveness study of adult (>18 years) STEMI-CS admissions receiving pre-hospital/in-hospital fibrinolysis were compared with those receiving PPCI. Admissions with alternate indications for fibrinolysis and STEMI-CS managed medically or with surgical revascularization (without fibrinolysis) were excluded. Outcomes of interest included in-hospital mortality, development of non-cardiac organ failure, complications, hospital length of stay, hospitalization costs, use of palliative care, and do-not-resuscitate status.ResultsDuring 2009-2017, 5297 and 110 452 admissions received initial fibrinolysis and PPCI, respectively. Compared with those receiving PPCI, the fibrinolysis group was more often non-White, with lower co-morbidity, and admitted on weekends and to small rural hospitals (all P < 0.001). In the fibrinolysis group, 95.3%, 77.4%, and 15.7% received angiography, PCI, and coronary artery bypass grafting, respectively. The fibrinolysis group had higher rates of haemorrhagic complications (13.5% vs. 9.9%; P < 0.001). The fibrinolysis group had comparable all-cause in-hospital mortality [logistic regression analysis: 28.8% vs. 28.5%; propensity-matched analysis: 30.8% vs. 30.3%; adjusted odds ratio 0.97 (95% confidence interval 0.90-1.05); P = 0.50]. The fibrinolysis group had comparable rates of acute organ failure, hospital length of stay, rates of palliative care referrals, do-not-resuscitate status use, and lesser hospitalization costs.ConclusionsThe use of initial fibrinolysis had comparable in-hospital mortality than those receiving PPCI in STEMI-CS in the contemporary era in this large national observational study.

Project description:BackgroundPrimary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) has been widely recognized as the preferred treatment for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). However, substantial numbers of STEMI patients cannot receive timely PPCI. Early fibrinolysis followed by routine percutaneous coronary intervention (FPCI) has been proposed as an effective and safe alternative for eligible patients. To date, few studies have compared FPCI with PPCI in terms of microvascular reperfusion. This study aimed to evaluate the microvascular function of FPCI and PPCI.MethodsSTEMI patients at the Peking University First Hospital and Miyun Hospital were enrolled in this retrospective study between January 2015 to December 2020. Microvascular function documented by the coronary angiography-derived index of microvascular resistance (caIMR) was measured at the final angiogram after revascularization. The primary end point was the caIMR of the culprit vessels. The secondary end points were in-hospital and follow-up major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), including cardiovascular death, non-fatal recurrent myocardial infarction, target-vessel revascularization (TVR), and non-fatal stroke/transient ischemic attacks (TIA). Details of the adverse clinical events were obtained from telephone interviews and electronic medical record systems until January 2022.ResultsIn total, 496 STEMI patients were enrolled in this cross-sectional retrospective study. Of these patients, 81 underwent FPCI, and 415 underwent PPCI. At the baseline, the PPCI patients had a higher-risk profile than the FPCI patients. The time from symptom onset to reperfusion therapy was significantly shorter in the FPCI group than the PPCI group (median 3.0 vs. 4.5 hours; P<0.001). The caIMR was significantly lower in the FPCI group than the PPCI group (median 20.34 vs. 40.33; P<0.001). The median follow-up duration was 4.1 years. During the follow-up period, the rate of MACE was lower in the FPCI group than the PPCI group [7 (10.1%) vs. 82 (20.8%), P=0.048]. After propensity score matching to adjust for the imbalances at the baseline, the caIMR remained significant and the clinical outcomes did not differ significantly between the two groups.ConclusionsIn eligible STEMI patients, clinically successful FPCI may be associated with better microvascular reperfusion and comparable clinical outcomes as compared with PPCI.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the effects of ischaemic postconditioning (IPC) therapy on hard clinical endpoints in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI). DESIGN:Systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effects of IPC on the outcomes of patients with STEMI. DATA SOURCES:PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched for relevant articles published prior to May 1, 2018. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES:Randomised trials comparing conventional PPCI to PPCI combined with IPC in STEMI patients were included. The primary endpoint was heart failure. Secondary endpoints were all-cause mortality and major adverse cardiac events (MACE), including cardiac death, heart failure and MI. The Cochrane Reviewer's Handbook 4.2 was used to assess the risk of bias. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS:Relevant data were extracted by two independent investigators. We derived pooled risk ratios (RRs) with random effects models. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses were performed. RESULTS:Ten studies that had enrolled 3137 patients were included. PPCI combined with IPC failed to reduce heart failure (RR: 0.88, 95% CI: 0.61 to 1.26, p=0.47; absolute risk: 3.64% in the IPC group and 4.11% in the PPCI only group), all-cause mortality (RR: 0.94, 95% CI: 0.69 to 1.27, p=0.68; absolute risk: 5.07% in the IPC group and 5.27% in the PPCI onlygroup), MACE (RR: 1.05, 95% CI: 0.83 to 1.32, p=0.69; absolute risk: 9.37% in the IPC group and 8.93% in the PPCI only group), cardiac death (RR: 1.28, 95% CI: 0.85 to 1.93, p=0.24; absolute risk: 4.28% in the IPC group and 3.25% in the PPCI only group) and MI (RR: 1.08, 95% CI: 0.38 to 3.12, p=0.88; absolute risk: 3.61% in the IPC group and 3.44% in the PPCI only group). CONCLUSIONS:IPC combined with PPCI does not reduce heart failure, MACE and all-cause mortality compared with traditional PPCI in patients with STEMI. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:CRD42017063959.

Dataset Information

Effect of Ischemic Postconditioning During Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Publications

Effect of Ischemic Postconditioning During Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets