Forskning
Udskriv Udskriv
Switch language
Region Hovedstaden - en del af Københavns Universitetshospital
Udgivet

Deferred vs Immediate Stenting in Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Collaborative Meta-analysis of Randomized Trials With Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging Data

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftReviewForskningpeer review

DOI

  1. Effect of Institutional Experience on Outcomes of Alcohol Septal Ablation for Hypertrophic Obstructive Cardiomyopathy

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  2. Heart Failure in Young Adults Is Associated With High Mortality: A Contemporary Population-Level Analysis

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  3. Acute Aortic Arch Perforation During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Bicuspid Aortic Stenosis and a Gothic Aortic Arch

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Vis graf over relationer

BACKGROUND: The role of deferred vs immediate stenting during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) remains controversial.

METHODS: We undertook a collaborative meta-analysis of study-level data by searching electronic scientific databases for investigations of primary PCI patients randomized to deferred or immediate stenting and subsequent cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. Primary angiographic and imaging outcomes were slow/no-reflow and microvascular obstruction (MVO), respectively. Main secondary outcome was recurrent ischemia.

RESULTS: Among 4 trials, a total of 1570 patients with STEMI were assigned to primary PCI with either deferred (n = 779) or immediate stenting (n = 791). Of these, 797 participants had analyzable cardiac magnetic resonance imaging examinations. Median clinical follow-up was 9 months. Patients treated with deferred stenting showed a lower risk of developing slow/no-reflow in the culprit vessel (risk ratio [RR], 0.54 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.41-0.72]; P < 0.001), a similar risk for MVO (RR, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.76-1.14]; P = 0.51), and trended higher in the risk of recurrent ischemia (RR, 2.42 [95% CI, 0.88-6.63]; P = 0.09) compared with those treated with immediate stenting. The treatment effect for slow/no-reflow and MVO correlated with a thrombus score grade > 3 at the baseline angiography and with the total stent length implanted in the culprit artery.

CONCLUSIONS: A strategy of deferred stenting during primary PCI improves angiographic but not imaging or clinical outcomes compared with immediate stenting. The potential lower risk for myocardial injury by deferred stenting in primary PCI patients with STEMI and high thrombus burden requires a confirmation in adequately sized randomized trials.

OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftThe Canadian journal of cardiology
Vol/bind34
Udgave nummer12
Sider (fra-til)1573-1580
Antal sider8
ISSN0828-282X
DOI
StatusUdgivet - dec. 2018

ID: 56431975