Cargando…
Comparison of myocardial reperfusion between intracoronary versus intravenous cangrelor administration in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention
BACKGROUND: Myocardial reperfusion is the main target of treatment in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). The intracoronary administration of cangrelor bolus could favor a higher local drug concentration, favoring an earlier thrombotic resolution and a reduced distal mi...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Via Medica
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10508075/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34581427 http://dx.doi.org/10.5603/CJ.a2021.0108 |
_version_ | 1785107452777201664 |
---|---|
author | Muraca, Iacopo Pennesi, Matteo Mattesini, Alessio Migliorini, Angela Carrabba, Nazario Virgili, Giacomo Bruscoli, Filippo Demola, Pierluigi Colombi, Riccardo Pontecorboli, Giulia Marchionni, Niccolò Di Mario, Carlo Valenti, Renato |
author_facet | Muraca, Iacopo Pennesi, Matteo Mattesini, Alessio Migliorini, Angela Carrabba, Nazario Virgili, Giacomo Bruscoli, Filippo Demola, Pierluigi Colombi, Riccardo Pontecorboli, Giulia Marchionni, Niccolò Di Mario, Carlo Valenti, Renato |
author_sort | Muraca, Iacopo |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Myocardial reperfusion is the main target of treatment in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). The intracoronary administration of cangrelor bolus could favor a higher local drug concentration, favoring an earlier thrombotic resolution and a reduced distal micro-embolization. METHODS: Seventy-one patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for STEMI: 37 treated with intracoronary and 34 with intravenous bolus administration of cangrelor. The primary endpoint was ST-segment elevation resolution (STR) ≥ 50% after 30 min from the end of the PCI. Other explorative reperfusion indices investigated were: STR ≥ 50% at 24 hours, STR ≥ 70% at 30 min, Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction frame count and the QT dispersion. Moreover, acute and subacute stent thrombosis, bleeding events and 30-day mortality have been evaluated. RESULTS: More frequent STR ≥ 50% was observed in the intravenous cangrelor bolus group as compared to the intracoronary administration at 30 min (71.9% vs. 45.5%; p = 0.033), the difference was maintained 24 hours after PCI (87.1% vs. 63.6%; p = 0.030). STR ≥ 70% at 30 min was statistically more frequent in the intravenous bolus administration cohort (66.7% vs. 28.6% p = 0.02). At multivariable analysis, intravenous cangrelor administration was significantly related to STR ≥ 50% (odds ratio: 3.586; 95% confidence interval: 1.134–11.335; p = 0.030). The incidence of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 3–5 bleedings was 15.5% and mortality was 4.2% without any significant difference between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion the results of the study do not show any advantages in the administration of intracoronary bolus of cangrelor in patients affected by STEMI and treated with primary PCI. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10508075 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Via Medica |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-105080752023-09-20 Comparison of myocardial reperfusion between intracoronary versus intravenous cangrelor administration in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention Muraca, Iacopo Pennesi, Matteo Mattesini, Alessio Migliorini, Angela Carrabba, Nazario Virgili, Giacomo Bruscoli, Filippo Demola, Pierluigi Colombi, Riccardo Pontecorboli, Giulia Marchionni, Niccolò Di Mario, Carlo Valenti, Renato Cardiol J Clinical Cardiology BACKGROUND: Myocardial reperfusion is the main target of treatment in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). The intracoronary administration of cangrelor bolus could favor a higher local drug concentration, favoring an earlier thrombotic resolution and a reduced distal micro-embolization. METHODS: Seventy-one patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for STEMI: 37 treated with intracoronary and 34 with intravenous bolus administration of cangrelor. The primary endpoint was ST-segment elevation resolution (STR) ≥ 50% after 30 min from the end of the PCI. Other explorative reperfusion indices investigated were: STR ≥ 50% at 24 hours, STR ≥ 70% at 30 min, Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction frame count and the QT dispersion. Moreover, acute and subacute stent thrombosis, bleeding events and 30-day mortality have been evaluated. RESULTS: More frequent STR ≥ 50% was observed in the intravenous cangrelor bolus group as compared to the intracoronary administration at 30 min (71.9% vs. 45.5%; p = 0.033), the difference was maintained 24 hours after PCI (87.1% vs. 63.6%; p = 0.030). STR ≥ 70% at 30 min was statistically more frequent in the intravenous bolus administration cohort (66.7% vs. 28.6% p = 0.02). At multivariable analysis, intravenous cangrelor administration was significantly related to STR ≥ 50% (odds ratio: 3.586; 95% confidence interval: 1.134–11.335; p = 0.030). The incidence of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 3–5 bleedings was 15.5% and mortality was 4.2% without any significant difference between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion the results of the study do not show any advantages in the administration of intracoronary bolus of cangrelor in patients affected by STEMI and treated with primary PCI. Via Medica 2023-08-31 /pmc/articles/PMC10508075/ /pubmed/34581427 http://dx.doi.org/10.5603/CJ.a2021.0108 Text en Copyright © 2023 Via Medica https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This article is available in open access under Creative Common Attribution-Non-Commercial-No Derivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) license, allowing to download articles and share them with others as long as they credit the authors and the publisher, but without permission to change them in any way or use them commercially |
spellingShingle | Clinical Cardiology Muraca, Iacopo Pennesi, Matteo Mattesini, Alessio Migliorini, Angela Carrabba, Nazario Virgili, Giacomo Bruscoli, Filippo Demola, Pierluigi Colombi, Riccardo Pontecorboli, Giulia Marchionni, Niccolò Di Mario, Carlo Valenti, Renato Comparison of myocardial reperfusion between intracoronary versus intravenous cangrelor administration in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention |
title | Comparison of myocardial reperfusion between intracoronary versus intravenous cangrelor administration in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention |
title_full | Comparison of myocardial reperfusion between intracoronary versus intravenous cangrelor administration in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention |
title_fullStr | Comparison of myocardial reperfusion between intracoronary versus intravenous cangrelor administration in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of myocardial reperfusion between intracoronary versus intravenous cangrelor administration in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention |
title_short | Comparison of myocardial reperfusion between intracoronary versus intravenous cangrelor administration in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention |
title_sort | comparison of myocardial reperfusion between intracoronary versus intravenous cangrelor administration in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention |
topic | Clinical Cardiology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10508075/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34581427 http://dx.doi.org/10.5603/CJ.a2021.0108 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT muracaiacopo comparisonofmyocardialreperfusionbetweenintracoronaryversusintravenouscangreloradministrationinpatientsundergoingprimarypercutaneouscoronaryintervention AT pennesimatteo comparisonofmyocardialreperfusionbetweenintracoronaryversusintravenouscangreloradministrationinpatientsundergoingprimarypercutaneouscoronaryintervention AT mattesinialessio comparisonofmyocardialreperfusionbetweenintracoronaryversusintravenouscangreloradministrationinpatientsundergoingprimarypercutaneouscoronaryintervention AT miglioriniangela comparisonofmyocardialreperfusionbetweenintracoronaryversusintravenouscangreloradministrationinpatientsundergoingprimarypercutaneouscoronaryintervention AT carrabbanazario comparisonofmyocardialreperfusionbetweenintracoronaryversusintravenouscangreloradministrationinpatientsundergoingprimarypercutaneouscoronaryintervention AT virgiligiacomo comparisonofmyocardialreperfusionbetweenintracoronaryversusintravenouscangreloradministrationinpatientsundergoingprimarypercutaneouscoronaryintervention AT bruscolifilippo comparisonofmyocardialreperfusionbetweenintracoronaryversusintravenouscangreloradministrationinpatientsundergoingprimarypercutaneouscoronaryintervention AT demolapierluigi comparisonofmyocardialreperfusionbetweenintracoronaryversusintravenouscangreloradministrationinpatientsundergoingprimarypercutaneouscoronaryintervention AT colombiriccardo comparisonofmyocardialreperfusionbetweenintracoronaryversusintravenouscangreloradministrationinpatientsundergoingprimarypercutaneouscoronaryintervention AT pontecorboligiulia comparisonofmyocardialreperfusionbetweenintracoronaryversusintravenouscangreloradministrationinpatientsundergoingprimarypercutaneouscoronaryintervention AT marchionniniccolo comparisonofmyocardialreperfusionbetweenintracoronaryversusintravenouscangreloradministrationinpatientsundergoingprimarypercutaneouscoronaryintervention AT dimariocarlo comparisonofmyocardialreperfusionbetweenintracoronaryversusintravenouscangreloradministrationinpatientsundergoingprimarypercutaneouscoronaryintervention AT valentirenato comparisonofmyocardialreperfusionbetweenintracoronaryversusintravenouscangreloradministrationinpatientsundergoingprimarypercutaneouscoronaryintervention |