Francesco Prati1, Enrico Romagnoli2, Ugo Limbruno3, Tomasz Pawlowski4, Silvio Fedele5, Laura Gatto6, Luca Di Vito7, Alessandro Pappalardo7, Vito Ramazzotti7, Andrea Picchi3, Antonio Trivisonno8, Laura Materia2, Piotre Pfiatkosky4, Giulia Paoletti2, Valeria Marco2, Luigi Tavazzi9, Francesco Versaci8, Gregg W Stone10. 1. San Giovanni Hospital, Rome, Italy; Centro per la Lotta Contro L'Infarto-CLI Foundation, Rome, Italy. Electronic address: fprati@hsangiovanni.roma.it. 2. Centro per la Lotta Contro L'Infarto-CLI Foundation, Rome, Italy. 3. Misericordia Hospital, Grosseto, Italy. 4. Central Clinical Hospital of the Ministry of Interior, Warsaw, Poland. 5. Sandro Pertini Hospital, Rome, Italy. 6. San Giovanni Hospital, Rome, Italy; Centro per la Lotta Contro L'Infarto-CLI Foundation, Rome, Italy. 7. San Giovanni Hospital, Rome, Italy. 8. Ospedale Civile Ferdinando Veneziale, Isernia, Italy. 9. GVM Care and Research, E.S. Health Science Foundation, Cotignola, Italy. 10. Columbia University Medical Center and the Cardiovascular Research Foundation, New York, NY.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Thrombus burden and distal embolization are predictive of no-reflow during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). We sought to compare the efficacy of pharmacological and catheter-based strategies for thrombus in patients with STEMI and high atherothrombotic burden. METHODS:Between January 2012 and December 2013, 128 STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI at 5 centers were randomly assigned in a 2 × 2 factorial design to intracoronary (IC) abciximab bolus (via the guide catheter) versus intralesion (IL) abciximab bolus, each with versus without aspiration thrombectomy (AT). Study end points were residual intrastent atherothrombotic burden, defined as the number of cross-sections with residual tissue area >10% as assessed by optical coherence tomography, and indices of angiographic and myocardial reperfusion. RESULTS:Residual intrastent atherothrombotic burden did not significantly differ with IL versus IC abciximab (median [interquartile range] 6.0 [1-15] vs 6.0 [2-11], P = .806) and with AT versus no aspiration (6.0 [1-13] vs 6.0 [2-12], P = .775). Intralesion abciximab administration was associated with improved angiographic myocardial reperfusion in terms of thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow (3 [3-3] vs 3 [2-3], P = .040), corrected TIMI frame count (12 ± 5 vs 17 ± 16, P = .021), and myocardial blush grade (3 [2-3] vs 3 [2-3], P = .035). In particular, IL abciximab was associated with higher occurrence of final TIMI 3 flow (90% vs 73.8%, P = .032) and myocardial blush grade 3 (71.6% vs 52.4%, P = .039). Conversely, AT had no significant effect on indices of angiographic or myocardial reperfusion. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with STEMI and high thrombotic burden, neither IL versus IC abciximab nor AT versus no aspiration reduced postprocedure intrastent atherothrombotic burden in patients with STEMI undergoing primary PCI. However, IL abciximab improved indices of angiographic and myocardial reperfusion compared to IC abciximab, benefits not apparent with AT.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND:Thrombus burden and distal embolization are predictive of no-reflow during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). We sought to compare the efficacy of pharmacological and catheter-based strategies for thrombus in patients with STEMI and high atherothrombotic burden. METHODS: Between January 2012 and December 2013, 128 STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI at 5 centers were randomly assigned in a 2 × 2 factorial design to intracoronary (IC) abciximab bolus (via the guide catheter) versus intralesion (IL) abciximab bolus, each with versus without aspiration thrombectomy (AT). Study end points were residual intrastent atherothrombotic burden, defined as the number of cross-sections with residual tissue area >10% as assessed by optical coherence tomography, and indices of angiographic and myocardial reperfusion. RESULTS: Residual intrastent atherothrombotic burden did not significantly differ with IL versus IC abciximab (median [interquartile range] 6.0 [1-15] vs 6.0 [2-11], P = .806) and with AT versus no aspiration (6.0 [1-13] vs 6.0 [2-12], P = .775). Intralesion abciximab administration was associated with improved angiographic myocardial reperfusion in terms of thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow (3 [3-3] vs 3 [2-3], P = .040), corrected TIMI frame count (12 ± 5 vs 17 ± 16, P = .021), and myocardial blush grade (3 [2-3] vs 3 [2-3], P = .035). In particular, IL abciximab was associated with higher occurrence of final TIMI 3 flow (90% vs 73.8%, P = .032) and myocardial blush grade 3 (71.6% vs 52.4%, P = .039). Conversely, AT had no significant effect on indices of angiographic or myocardial reperfusion. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with STEMI and high thrombotic burden, neither IL versus IC abciximab nor AT versus no aspiration reduced postprocedure intrastent atherothrombotic burden in patients with STEMI undergoing primary PCI. However, IL abciximab improved indices of angiographic and myocardial reperfusion compared to IC abciximab, benefits not apparent with AT.
Authors: Dhanuka Perera; Krishnaraj S Rathod; Oliver Guttmann; Anne-Marie Beirne; Constantinos O'Mahony; Roshan Weerackody; Andreas Baumbach; Anthony Mathur; Andrew Wragg; Daniel A Jones Journal: Am J Cardiovasc Dis Date: 2020-12-15