Literature DB >> 17261398

Protection of Distal Embolization in High-Risk Patients with Acute ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction (PREMIAR).

Fernando A Cura1, Alejandro Garcia Escudero, Daniel Berrocal, Oscar Mendiz, Marcelo S Trivi, Juan Fernandez, Alejandro Palacios, Mariano Albertal, Ruben Piraino, Miguel Angel Riccitelli, Luis Gruberg, Miguel Ballarino, Jose Milei, Ricardo Baeza, Jorge Thierer, Liliana Grinfeld, Mitchell Krucoff, William O'Neill, Jorge Belardi.   

Abstract

Distal embolization may decrease myocardial reperfusion after primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Nonetheless, results of previous trials assessing the role of distal protection during primary PCI have been controversial. The Protection of Distal Embolization in High-Risk Patients with Acute ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Trial (PREMIAR) was a prospective, randomized, controlled study designed to evaluate the role of filter-based distal protection during PCI in patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction at high risk of embolic events (including only baseline Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction grade 0 to 2 flow). The primary end point was continuous monitoring of ST-segment resolution. Secondary end points included core laboratory analysis of angiographic myocardial blush, ejection fraction measured by cardiac ultrasound, and adverse cardiac events at 6 months. From a total of 194 enrolled patients, 140 subjects were randomized to PCI with or without embolic protection, and 54 were included in a registry arm due to the presence of angiographic exclusion criteria. Baseline characteristics were comparable between arms. The rate of complete ST-segment resolution (>or=70%) at 60 minutes was similar in patients treated with or without distal protection (61.2% vs 60.3%, respectively, p = 0.85). Angiographic myocardial blush (67% vs 70.7%, p = 0.73), in-hospital ejection fraction (47.4 +/- 9.9% vs 45.3 +/- 7.3%, p = 0.29), and combined end point of death, heart failure, or reinfarction at 6 months (14.3% vs 15.7%, p = 0.81) were consistently achieved in a similar proportion in the 2 groups. In conclusion, the use of filter-based distal protection is safe and effectively retrieves debris; however, such use does not translate into an improvement of myocardial reperfusion, left ventricular performance, or clinical outcomes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17261398     DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2006.08.038

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Cardiol        ISSN: 0002-9149            Impact factor:   2.778


  10 in total

1.  Thrombus Aspiration in STEMI.

Authors:  Konstantinos Marmagkiolis; Dmitriy N Feldman; Konstantinos Charitakis
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2016-01

2.  Vessel masking improves densitometric myocardial perfusion assessment.

Authors:  Tamás Ungi; Zsolt Zimmermann; Erika Balázs; András Lassó; Imre Ungi; Tamás Forster; András Palkó; Attila Nemes
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2008-10-04       Impact factor: 2.357

3.  Early versus late ST-segment resolution and clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction.

Authors:  H B van der Zwaan; M G Stoel; J W Roos-Hesselink; G Veen; E Boersma; C von Birgelen
Journal:  Neth Heart J       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 2.380

Review 4.  Treating thrombus in the coronary arteries.

Authors:  B Boztosun; R D Acar
Journal:  Herz       Date:  2013-08-08       Impact factor: 1.443

5.  Scintigraphic evaluation of routine filterwire distal protection in percutaneous coronary intervention for acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Anne Kaltoft; Søren Steen Nielsen; Christian Juhl Terkelsen; Morten Bøttcher; Jens Flensted Lassen; Lars Romer Krusell; Steen Dalby Kristensen; Jan Ravkilde; Henning Kelbaek; Hans Erik Bøtker; Evald Høj Christiansen; Michael Rehling; Leif Thuesen
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2009-06-12       Impact factor: 5.952

Review 6.  Systematic review: comparative effectiveness of adjunctive devices in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention of native vessels.

Authors:  Diana M Sobieraj; C Michael White; Jeffrey Kluger; Vanita Tongbram; Jennifer Colby; Wendy T Chen; Sagar S Makanji; Soyon Lee; Ajibade Ashaye; Craig I Coleman
Journal:  BMC Cardiovasc Disord       Date:  2011-12-20       Impact factor: 2.298

Review 7.  A fresh look at coronary microembolization.

Authors:  Petra Kleinbongard; Gerd Heusch
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2021-11-16       Impact factor: 49.421

8.  Comparison of two visual angiographic perfusion grades in acute myocardial infarction.

Authors:  Tamás Ungi; Viktor Sasi; Imre Ungi; Tamás Forster; András Palkó; Attila Nemes
Journal:  Ups J Med Sci       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 2.384

Review 9.  Embolic protection devices in saphenous vein graft and native vessel percutaneous intervention: a review.

Authors:  Eron Sturm; David Goldberg; Sheldon Goldberg
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rev       Date:  2012-08

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

Authors:  Ryota Teramoto; Kenji Sakata; Kenji Miwa; Takao Matsubara; Toshihiko Yasuda; Masaru Inoue; Hirofumi Okada; Honin Kanaya; Masa-Aki Kawashiri; Masakazu Yamagishi; Kenshi Hayashi
Journal:  J Atheroscler Thromb       Date:  2016-06-02       Impact factor: 4.928

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.