B Sun1, J Liu2, H Yin1, S Yang3, Z Liu1, T Chen1, J Li1, C Guo1, Z Jiang4. 1. Department of Cardiology, The Third Hospital of Hebei Medical University, NO.139 Ziqiang Road, Qiaoxi District, 050051, Shijiazhuang, China. 2. Department of Occupational and Environmental Health, Xiangya School of Public Health, Central South University, NO.238 Xiangya Road, Kaifu District, 410078, Changsha, China. 3. Center for Disease Control and Prevention of Hebei Province; NO.97 Huaian Road, Department of Epidemiology and Health Statistics, Yuhua District, 050021, Shijiazhuang, China. 4. Department of Cardiology, The Third Hospital of Hebei Medical University, NO.139 Ziqiang Road, Qiaoxi District, 050051, Shijiazhuang, China. jiangzhiandoctor@163.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The results of several large-scale randomized controlled trials are controversial regarding the advantages of delayed stenting (DS) compared with immediate stenting (IS). We sought to determine whether DS has benefits for patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) with a high thrombus burden compared with IS. METHODS: We systematically searched four electronic databases. Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) grade 3 flow, TIMI myocardial blush grade (TMBG), complete ST-segment resolution (>70%), major adverse cardiac events (MACE), and major bleeding complications were studied as outcomes. Data analysis was performed using a random-effects model utilizing the Review Manager 5.3 software. RESULTS: Our meta-analysis included eight studies involving 744 patients. DS showed greater benefits than IS in terms of TIMI grade 3 flow (odds ratio [OR]: 5.09, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.98-13.02, p < 0.001), TMBG (OR: 4.17, 95% CI: 1.87-9.31, p < 0.001), complete ST-segment resolution (OR: 2.16, 95% CI: 1.36-3.43, p = 0.001), and MACE (OR: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.25-0.94, p = 0.03). No significant difference was observed regarding major bleeding events (OR: 1.76, 95% CI: 0.40-7.66, p = 0.45). CONCLUSION: DS yielded satisfactory outcomes regarding myocardial tissue reperfusion, demonstrated by the improved TIMI flow grade, TMBG, complete ST-segment resolution, and decreased MACEs without increasing major bleeding events in patients with STEMI and a high thrombus burden. DS may be preferred to IS for treating patients with this characteristic presentation.
BACKGROUND: The results of several large-scale randomized controlled trials are controversial regarding the advantages of delayed stenting (DS) compared with immediate stenting (IS). We sought to determine whether DS has benefits for patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) with a high thrombus burden compared with IS. METHODS: We systematically searched four electronic databases. Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) grade 3 flow, TIMI myocardial blush grade (TMBG), complete ST-segment resolution (>70%), major adverse cardiac events (MACE), and major bleeding complications were studied as outcomes. Data analysis was performed using a random-effects model utilizing the Review Manager 5.3 software. RESULTS: Our meta-analysis included eight studies involving 744 patients. DS showed greater benefits than IS in terms of TIMI grade 3 flow (odds ratio [OR]: 5.09, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.98-13.02, p < 0.001), TMBG (OR: 4.17, 95% CI: 1.87-9.31, p < 0.001), complete ST-segment resolution (OR: 2.16, 95% CI: 1.36-3.43, p = 0.001), and MACE (OR: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.25-0.94, p = 0.03). No significant difference was observed regarding major bleeding events (OR: 1.76, 95% CI: 0.40-7.66, p = 0.45). CONCLUSION:DS yielded satisfactory outcomes regarding myocardial tissue reperfusion, demonstrated by the improved TIMI flow grade, TMBG, complete ST-segment resolution, and decreased MACEs without increasing major bleeding events in patients with STEMI and a high thrombus burden. DS may be preferred to IS for treating patients with this characteristic presentation.
Authors: Giovanni Luigi De Maria; Mohammad Alkhalil; Evangelos K Oikonomou; Mathias Wolfrum; Robin P Choudhury; Adrian P Banning Journal: J Interv Cardiol Date: 2017-03-28 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Giulio Guagliumi; Marco A Costa; Vasile Sirbu; Giuseppe Musumeci; Hiram G Bezerra; Nobuaki Suzuki; Aleksandre Matiashvili; Nikoloz Lortkipanidze; Laurian Mihalcsik; Antonio Trivisonno; Orazio Valsecchi; Gary S Mintz; Ovidiu Dressler; Helen Parise; Akiko Maehara; Ecaterina Cristea; Alexandra J Lansky; Roxana Mehran; Gregg W Stone Journal: Circulation Date: 2011-01-10 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: David Brosh; Abid R Assali; Aviv Mager; Avital Porter; David Hasdai; Igal Teplitsky; Eldad Rechavia; Shmuel Fuchs; Alexander Battler; Ran Kornowski Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2006-12-20 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Borja Ibanez; Stefan James; Stefan Agewall; Manuel J Antunes; Chiara Bucciarelli-Ducci; Héctor Bueno; Alida L P Caforio; Filippo Crea; John A Goudevenos; Sigrun Halvorsen; Gerhard Hindricks; Adnan Kastrati; Mattie J Lenzen; Eva Prescott; Marco Roffi; Marco Valgimigli; Christoph Varenhorst; Pascal Vranckx; Petr Widimský Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2018-01-07 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Sofia Dias; Nicky J Welton; Alex J Sutton; Deborah M Caldwell; Guobing Lu; A E Ades Journal: Med Decis Making Date: 2013-07 Impact factor: 2.583