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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Magdy, Ahmed M., Demitry, Salwa R., Hasan-Ali, Hosam, Zaky, Mohamed, Abd El-Hady, Mohamed, Abdel Ghany, Mohamed
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