Julien Pascal1, Aurélie Veugeois2, Michel Slama3, Saliah Rahal4, Loic Belle5, Christophe Caussin2, Nicolas Amabile6. 1. Cardiology Department, Centre Hospitalier Le Raincy-Montfermeil, Montfermeil, France. 2. Department of Cardiology, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France. 3. Cardiology Department, CHU Antoine Beclère, Clamart, France; Cardiology Department, Centre Marie Lannelongue, LePlessis Robinson, France. 4. Cardiology Department, Centre Marie Lannelongue, LePlessis Robinson, France. 5. Cardiology Department, CH Annecy, Annecy, France. 6. Department of Cardiology, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France. Electronic address: nicolas.amabile@imm.fr.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The minimalist immediate mechanical intervention (MIMI) strategy aims to restore normal anterograde flow in the culprit artery (by using manual thrombectomy or small-sized balloon predilation) and to defer potential stent implantation. This study evaluated the applicability and midterm clinical results of the MIMI strategy for ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) management. METHODS: This observational study included consecutive patients admitted for ongoing STEMI (<24 hours' evolution) at 1 institution between June 2010 and June 2013. Revascularization was performed at the physician's discretion. We compared retrospectively "intentional immediate stenting" (standard technique) and "intentional delayed stenting" (MIMI technique). RESULTS: Twenty percent of the 279 included patients were treated with the MIMI strategy. These patients were significantly younger and were more frequently men and smokers compared with patients who underwent the standard procedure. The rate of acute reocclusion of the culprit artery related to STEMI in the MIMI group was 1.8%. Drug-eluting stents were used more frequently in the MIMI group (52% vs 27% in the standard group; P < 0.001). The culprit lesion was stented less frequently in the patients treated with MIMI compared with patients in the other group (28.5% vs 9%; P < 0.001). The 1-year actuarial survival free from major adverse cardiovascular events was higher in the MIMI group than in the standard group (96.3% ± 1.8% vs 83.8% ± 2.5%; P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The MIMI strategy can be applied in selected patients with STEMI. In our centre, this strategy is associated with less systematic culprit lesion stenting and more implantation of drug-eluting stents. However, this needs to be evaluated further in a randomized trial.
BACKGROUND: The minimalist immediate mechanical intervention (MIMI) strategy aims to restore normal anterograde flow in the culprit artery (by using manual thrombectomy or small-sized balloon predilation) and to defer potential stent implantation. This study evaluated the applicability and midterm clinical results of the MIMI strategy for ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) management. METHODS: This observational study included consecutive patients admitted for ongoing STEMI (<24 hours' evolution) at 1 institution between June 2010 and June 2013. Revascularization was performed at the physician's discretion. We compared retrospectively "intentional immediate stenting" (standard technique) and "intentional delayed stenting" (MIMI technique). RESULTS: Twenty percent of the 279 included patients were treated with the MIMI strategy. These patients were significantly younger and were more frequently men and smokers compared with patients who underwent the standard procedure. The rate of acute reocclusion of the culprit artery related to STEMI in the MIMI group was 1.8%. Drug-eluting stents were used more frequently in the MIMI group (52% vs 27% in the standard group; P < 0.001). The culprit lesion was stented less frequently in the patients treated with MIMI compared with patients in the other group (28.5% vs 9%; P < 0.001). The 1-year actuarial survival free from major adverse cardiovascular events was higher in the MIMI group than in the standard group (96.3% ± 1.8% vs 83.8% ± 2.5%; P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The MIMI strategy can be applied in selected patients with STEMI. In our centre, this strategy is associated with less systematic culprit lesion stenting and more implantation of drug-eluting stents. However, this needs to be evaluated further in a randomized trial.