Cargando…
Stenting deferral in primary percutaneous coronary intervention: exploring benefits and suitable interval in heavy thrombus burden
BACKGROUND: Deferred stenting, despite being successful in early studies, showed no benefit in recent trials. However, these trials were testing routine deferral; not in patients with heavy thrombus burden. RESULTS: This is a prospective, Randomized Clinical Trial that included 150 patients who pres...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8429529/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34499263 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s43044-021-00203-3 |
_version_ | 1783750547333971968 |
---|---|
author | Magdy, Ahmed M. Demitry, Salwa R. Hasan-Ali, Hosam Zaky, Mohamed Abd El-Hady, Mohamed Abdel Ghany, Mohamed |
author_facet | Magdy, Ahmed M. Demitry, Salwa R. Hasan-Ali, Hosam Zaky, Mohamed Abd El-Hady, Mohamed Abdel Ghany, Mohamed |
author_sort | Magdy, Ahmed M. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Deferred stenting, despite being successful in early studies, showed no benefit in recent trials. However, these trials were testing routine deferral; not in patients with heavy thrombus burden. RESULTS: This is a prospective, Randomized Clinical Trial that included 150 patients who presented with STEMI, patients were allocated into three equal groups after the coronary angiography ± primary intervention and before stenting of the culprit lesion; group (A) included 50 patients with early deferral of stenting, group (B) included 50 patients with late deferral and group (C) included 50 patients with immediate stenting. No-reflow was significantly higher in group C, while Final TIMI flow grade 3 and MBG grade 3 were significantly higher in group A and B than group C; p = 0.019 and < 0.001 respectively, with no significant difference between groups A and B, only the thrombus resolution in group B was significantly higher than group A; p < 0.001. Finally, 6-months, over-all MACE was significantly higher in group C (34.7% vs. 14.6% and 16.3%, p = 0.029). CONCLUSIONS: Stent deferral was proved to be better than immediate stenting after recanalization of IRA, in achieving TIMI III flow, reducing risk of 6 months MACE, and restoration of myocardial function in a subset of STEMI patients presenting with large thrombus burden. While, no significant difference was found between both deferral times in final TIMI flow, or clinical outcomes. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8429529 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-84295292021-09-24 Stenting deferral in primary percutaneous coronary intervention: exploring benefits and suitable interval in heavy thrombus burden Magdy, Ahmed M. Demitry, Salwa R. Hasan-Ali, Hosam Zaky, Mohamed Abd El-Hady, Mohamed Abdel Ghany, Mohamed Egypt Heart J Research BACKGROUND: Deferred stenting, despite being successful in early studies, showed no benefit in recent trials. However, these trials were testing routine deferral; not in patients with heavy thrombus burden. RESULTS: This is a prospective, Randomized Clinical Trial that included 150 patients who presented with STEMI, patients were allocated into three equal groups after the coronary angiography ± primary intervention and before stenting of the culprit lesion; group (A) included 50 patients with early deferral of stenting, group (B) included 50 patients with late deferral and group (C) included 50 patients with immediate stenting. No-reflow was significantly higher in group C, while Final TIMI flow grade 3 and MBG grade 3 were significantly higher in group A and B than group C; p = 0.019 and < 0.001 respectively, with no significant difference between groups A and B, only the thrombus resolution in group B was significantly higher than group A; p < 0.001. Finally, 6-months, over-all MACE was significantly higher in group C (34.7% vs. 14.6% and 16.3%, p = 0.029). CONCLUSIONS: Stent deferral was proved to be better than immediate stenting after recanalization of IRA, in achieving TIMI III flow, reducing risk of 6 months MACE, and restoration of myocardial function in a subset of STEMI patients presenting with large thrombus burden. While, no significant difference was found between both deferral times in final TIMI flow, or clinical outcomes. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021-09-09 /pmc/articles/PMC8429529/ /pubmed/34499263 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s43044-021-00203-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Research Magdy, Ahmed M. Demitry, Salwa R. Hasan-Ali, Hosam Zaky, Mohamed Abd El-Hady, Mohamed Abdel Ghany, Mohamed Stenting deferral in primary percutaneous coronary intervention: exploring benefits and suitable interval in heavy thrombus burden |
title | Stenting deferral in primary percutaneous coronary intervention: exploring benefits and suitable interval in heavy thrombus burden |
title_full | Stenting deferral in primary percutaneous coronary intervention: exploring benefits and suitable interval in heavy thrombus burden |
title_fullStr | Stenting deferral in primary percutaneous coronary intervention: exploring benefits and suitable interval in heavy thrombus burden |
title_full_unstemmed | Stenting deferral in primary percutaneous coronary intervention: exploring benefits and suitable interval in heavy thrombus burden |
title_short | Stenting deferral in primary percutaneous coronary intervention: exploring benefits and suitable interval in heavy thrombus burden |
title_sort | stenting deferral in primary percutaneous coronary intervention: exploring benefits and suitable interval in heavy thrombus burden |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8429529/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34499263 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s43044-021-00203-3 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT magdyahmedm stentingdeferralinprimarypercutaneouscoronaryinterventionexploringbenefitsandsuitableintervalinheavythrombusburden AT demitrysalwar stentingdeferralinprimarypercutaneouscoronaryinterventionexploringbenefitsandsuitableintervalinheavythrombusburden AT hasanalihosam stentingdeferralinprimarypercutaneouscoronaryinterventionexploringbenefitsandsuitableintervalinheavythrombusburden AT zakymohamed stentingdeferralinprimarypercutaneouscoronaryinterventionexploringbenefitsandsuitableintervalinheavythrombusburden AT abdelhadymohamed stentingdeferralinprimarypercutaneouscoronaryinterventionexploringbenefitsandsuitableintervalinheavythrombusburden AT abdelghanymohamed stentingdeferralinprimarypercutaneouscoronaryinterventionexploringbenefitsandsuitableintervalinheavythrombusburden |