BACKGROUND: No-reflow occurring during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has been associated with poor inhospital outcomes. The objectives of this analysis were to evaluate the occurrence of no-reflow as an independent predictor of adverse events and to determine whether treatment with intracoronary vasodilator therapy affected clinical outcomes. METHODS: We prospectively collected data from 4264 consecutive patients undergoing PCI, identifying those with no-reflow, and analyzed their treatments and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: No-reflow was identified in 135 of 4264 patients (3.2%). Baseline demographics were comparable, but patients with no-reflow were more likely to have acute myocardial infarction, unstable angina, and cardiogenic shock and to have undergone saphenous vein graft interventions. No-reflow was highly predictive of postprocedural myocardial infarction (17.7% vs 3.5% in patients without no-reflow, P <.001) and death (7.4% vs 2.0%, P <.001) and remained a strong independent predictor of death or myocardial infarction after multivariate analysis (odds ratio 3.6, P <.001). The administration of intracoronary verapamil, sodium nitroprusside, or both was not associated with a reduction in the rate of death or myocardial infarction (adjusted odds ratio of death or myocardial infarction 1.04, P =.945 for nitroprusside; and adjusted odds ratio of death or myocardial infarction 0.94, P =.91 for verapamil), despite an improvement in angiographic flow rates for patients treated with sodium nitroprusside. CONCLUSIONS: No-reflow is a strong independent predictor of inhospital mortality and postprocedural myocardial infarction. Administration of verapamil or sodium nitroprusside was not associated with improved inhospital outcomes in patients with no-reflow, although anterograde flow rates were improved in patients treated with sodium nitroprusside.
BACKGROUND: No-reflow occurring during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has been associated with poor inhospital outcomes. The objectives of this analysis were to evaluate the occurrence of no-reflow as an independent predictor of adverse events and to determine whether treatment with intracoronary vasodilator therapy affected clinical outcomes. METHODS: We prospectively collected data from 4264 consecutive patients undergoing PCI, identifying those with no-reflow, and analyzed their treatments and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: No-reflow was identified in 135 of 4264 patients (3.2%). Baseline demographics were comparable, but patients with no-reflow were more likely to have acute myocardial infarction, unstable angina, and cardiogenic shock and to have undergone saphenous vein graft interventions. No-reflow was highly predictive of postprocedural myocardial infarction (17.7% vs 3.5% in patients without no-reflow, P <.001) and death (7.4% vs 2.0%, P <.001) and remained a strong independent predictor of death or myocardial infarction after multivariate analysis (odds ratio 3.6, P <.001). The administration of intracoronary verapamil, sodium nitroprusside, or both was not associated with a reduction in the rate of death or myocardial infarction (adjusted odds ratio of death or myocardial infarction 1.04, P =.945 for nitroprusside; and adjusted odds ratio of death or myocardial infarction 0.94, P =.91 for verapamil), despite an improvement in angiographic flow rates for patients treated with sodium nitroprusside. CONCLUSIONS: No-reflow is a strong independent predictor of inhospital mortality and postprocedural myocardial infarction. Administration of verapamil or sodium nitroprusside was not associated with improved inhospital outcomes in patients with no-reflow, although anterograde flow rates were improved in patients treated with sodium nitroprusside.
Authors: Amanda J Leblanc; Jeremy S Touroo; James B Hoying; Stuart K Williams Journal: Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol Date: 2011-12-02 Impact factor: 4.733
Authors: Eric A Secemsky; Enrico G Ferro; Sunil V Rao; Ajay Kirtane; Hector Tamez; Pearl Zakroysky; Daniel Wojdyla; Steven M Bradley; David J Cohen; Robert W Yeh Journal: JAMA Cardiol Date: 2019-02-01 Impact factor: 14.676
Authors: Sahar S Abdelmoneim; Matthew W Martinez; Sunil V Mankad; Mathieu Bernier; Abhijeet Dhoble; Patricia A Pellikka; Krishnaswamy Chandrasekaran; Jae K Oh; Sharon L Mulvagh Journal: Heart Vessels Date: 2014-01-10 Impact factor: 2.037