OBJECTIVES: To study the impact of injection of verapamil and adenosine in the coronary arteries on TIMI (Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction) frame count (TFC) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with an acute coronary syndrome (ACS). METHODS: Prospective, randomised, controlled study of the intracoronary administration of normal saline versus verapamil versus adenosine in patients undergoing PCI in the setting of an ACS, even when flow is visually established to be normal or near normal. Patients were randomised to receive verapamil (n = 49), adenosine (n = 51) or normal saline (n = 50) after PCI. Quantitative angiography, TIMI flow grade (TFG), TFC and myocardial blush grade were assessed before PCI, after PCI and after drugs were given. Wall motion index (WMI) was measured at days 1 and 30. RESULTS: 9 patients in the verapamil group developed transient heart block, not seen with adenosine (p <or= 0.001). Compared with saline, coronary flow measured by TFC improved significantly and WMI improved slightly but insignificantly in both the verapamil (TFC: p = 0.02; mean difference in improvement in WMI: 0.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.015 to 0.17, p = 0.02) and the adenosine groups (TFC: p = 0.002; mean difference in improvement in WMI: 0.08, 95% CI 0.004 to 0.16, p = 0.04). The improvements in TFC and WMI did not differ significantly between the verapamil and the adenosine groups (TFC: p = 0.2; mean difference in improvement in WMI: 0.01, 95% CI -0.055 to 0.08, p = 0.7, respectively). CONCLUSION: Administration of verapamil or adenosine significantly improves coronary flow and WMI after PCI in the setting of an ACS. Flow and WMI did not differ significantly between verapamil and adenosine but verapamil was associated with the development of transient heart block.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: To study the impact of injection of verapamil and adenosine in the coronary arteries on TIMI (Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction) frame count (TFC) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with an acute coronary syndrome (ACS). METHODS: Prospective, randomised, controlled study of the intracoronary administration of normal saline versus verapamil versus adenosine in patients undergoing PCI in the setting of an ACS, even when flow is visually established to be normal or near normal. Patients were randomised to receive verapamil (n = 49), adenosine (n = 51) or normal saline (n = 50) after PCI. Quantitative angiography, TIMI flow grade (TFG), TFC and myocardial blush grade were assessed before PCI, after PCI and after drugs were given. Wall motion index (WMI) was measured at days 1 and 30. RESULTS: 9 patients in the verapamil group developed transient heart block, not seen with adenosine (p <or= 0.001). Compared with saline, coronary flow measured by TFC improved significantly and WMI improved slightly but insignificantly in both the verapamil (TFC: p = 0.02; mean difference in improvement in WMI: 0.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.015 to 0.17, p = 0.02) and the adenosine groups (TFC: p = 0.002; mean difference in improvement in WMI: 0.08, 95% CI 0.004 to 0.16, p = 0.04). The improvements in TFC and WMI did not differ significantly between the verapamil and the adenosine groups (TFC: p = 0.2; mean difference in improvement in WMI: 0.01, 95% CI -0.055 to 0.08, p = 0.7, respectively). CONCLUSION: Administration of verapamil or adenosine significantly improves coronary flow and WMI after PCI in the setting of an ACS. Flow and WMI did not differ significantly between verapamil and adenosine but verapamil was associated with the development of transient heart block.
Authors: O Oldenburg; H Eggebrecht; J Herrmann; C K Naber; M Haude; R Erbel; D Baumgart Journal: Cardiovasc Drugs Ther Date: 2000-12 Impact factor: 3.727
Authors: Andrew D Michaels; Mark Appleby; Matthew H Otten; Kent Dauterman; Thomas A Ports; Tony M Chou; C Michael Gibson Journal: J Invasive Cardiol Date: 2002-06 Impact factor: 2.022
Authors: Sang Yup Lim; Eun Hui Bae; Myung Ho Jeong; Dong Goo Kang; Yeon Sang Lee; Kye Hun Kim; Sang Hyun Lee; Kyung Ho Yoon; Seo Na Hong; Hyung Wook Park; Young Joon Hong; Ju Han Kim; Weon Kim; Young Keun Ahn; Jeong Gwan Cho; Jong Chun Park; Jung Chaee Kang Journal: Circ J Date: 2004-10 Impact factor: 2.993
Authors: Jose P S Henriques; Felix Zijlstra; Arnoud W J van 't Hof; Menko-Jan de Boer; Jan-Henk E Dambrink; Marcel Gosselink; Jan C A Hoorntje; Harry Suryapranata Journal: Circulation Date: 2003-04-14 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Peter Heiss; B Loewenhardt; C Manke; A Hellinger; K H Dietl; H J Schlitt; K Scheibl; S Feuerbach; C Paetzel Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2010-06-20 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Vijayalakshmi Kunadian; Cafer Zorkun; Scott P Williams; Leah H Biller; Alexandra M Palmer; Katherine J Ogando; Michelle E Lew; Navin Nethala; William J Gibson; Susan J Marble; Jacqueline L Buros; C Michael Gibson Journal: J Thromb Thrombolysis Date: 2008-09-26 Impact factor: 2.300
Authors: Vijayalakshmi Kunadian; Caitlin Harrigan; Cafer Zorkun; Alexandra M Palmer; Katherine J Ogando; Leah H Biller; Erin E Lord; Scott P Williams; Michelle E Lew; Lauren N Ciaglo; Jacqueline L Buros; Susan J Marble; William J Gibson; C Michael Gibson Journal: J Thromb Thrombolysis Date: 2008-04-20 Impact factor: 2.300
Authors: Alexander R Payne; Colin Berry; Orla Doolin; Margaret McEntegart; Mark C Petrie; M Mitchell Lindsay; Stuart Hood; David Carrick; Niko Tzemos; Peter Weale; Christie McComb; John Foster; Ian Ford; Keith G Oldroyd Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2012-08-24 Impact factor: 5.501
Authors: David Carrick; Keith G Oldroyd; Margaret McEntegart; Caroline Haig; Mark C Petrie; Hany Eteiba; Stuart Hood; Colum Owens; Stuart Watkins; Jamie Layland; Mitchell Lindsay; Eileen Peat; Alan Rae; Miles Behan; Arvind Sood; W Stewart Hillis; Ify Mordi; Ahmed Mahrous; Nadeem Ahmed; Rebekah Wilson; Laura Lasalle; Philippe Généreux; Ian Ford; Colin Berry Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2014-02-27 Impact factor: 24.094