Cargando…

Impact of Distal Protection with Filter-Type Device on Long-term Outcome after Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Acute Myocardial Infarction: Clinical Results with Filtrap(®)

Aim: Although distal embolization during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) deteriorates cardiac function, whether distal protection (DP) can improve prognosis is still controversial. We investigated whether a filter-type DP device, Filtrap(®), could impro...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Teramoto, Ryota, Sakata, Kenji, Miwa, Kenji, Matsubara, Takao, Yasuda, Toshihiko, Inoue, Masaru, Okada, Hirofumi, Kanaya, Honin, Kawashiri, Masa-aki, Yamagishi, Masakazu, Hayashi, Kenshi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Japan Atherosclerosis Society 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5221494/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27251330
http://dx.doi.org/10.5551/jat.34215
Descripción
Sumario:Aim: Although distal embolization during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) deteriorates cardiac function, whether distal protection (DP) can improve prognosis is still controversial. We investigated whether a filter-type DP device, Filtrap(®), could improve long-term outcomes after PCI for AMI. Method: We studied 164 patients (130 men, mean age: 65.7 years) who underwent PCI. Patients were divided into two groups based on the use of Filtrap(®). The occurrence of congestive heart failure (CHF) and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) defined as cardiac death, recurrent AMI, and target vessel revascularization were compared. Result: Between DP (n = 53, 41 men, mean age: 65.5 years) and non-DP (n = 111, 89 men, mean age: 65.8 years) groups, although there was significantly greater plaque area in the DP group than in the non-DP group, there were no significant differences in coronary reperfusion flow after PCI. Interestingly, patients with CHF in the non-DP group exhibited a higher CK level than those in the DP group. During a 2-year follow-up period, cumulative CHF was significantly lower in the DP group than in the non-DP group (log-rank p = 0.018), and there was no significant difference in the MACE rate (log-rank p = 0.238). The use of DP device could not predict MACE, but could predict CHF by multivariate analysis (odds ratio = 0.099, 95% CI: 0.02–0.42, p = 0.005). Conclusion: These results demonstrate that favorable clinical outcomes could be achieved by the filter-type DP device in AMI, particularly in patients with CHF.