ABSTRACT
Administration of glycoprotein 2b/3a inhibitors is an effective adjunctive treatment strategy during primary percutaneous coronary intervention [PPCI] for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction [STEMI]. Recent data suggest that an intracoronary administration of these drugs can increase the efficacy of PPCI. This study was done to find any potential difference in terms of efficacy of administering intracoronary Abciximab vs. intravenous Eptifibatide in primary PPCI. A total of 40 STEMI patients who underwent PPCI within 12 hours of symptom onset were randomized to either an intracoronary Abciximab [0.25 microg/kg] bolus or two boluses of intravenous Eptifibatide [0.180 microg/kg] each 10 minutes. The primary end points were enzymatic infarct size, myocardial reperfusion measured as ST-segment resolution [STR], and post-procedural thrombolysis in myocardial infarction [TIMI] grade flow of the infarct-related artery. The secondary end points were intra-procedural adverse effect [arrhythmia] and no-reflow phenomenon, in-hospital mortality, reinfarction, hemorrhage, and post-procedural global systolic function. Post-procedural TIMI grade 3 flow was achieved in 95% and 90% of the intracoronary Abciximab and intravenous Eptifibatide groups, respectively [p value = 0.61]. The infarct size, as assessed by the area under the curve of creatine phosphokinase-MB in the first 48 hours after PPCI [micromol/L/hr], was similar between the intracoronary Abciximab and intravenous Eptifibatide groups: 6591 [interquartile range [IQR], 3006.0 to 11112.0] versus 7,294 [IQR, 3795.5 to 11803.5]; p value = 0.59. Complete STR was achieved in 55% and 45% of the intracoronary Abciximab and intravenous Eptifibatide groups, respectively [p value = 0.87]. No deaths, urgent revascularizations, reinfarctions, or TIMI major bleeding events were observed in either group. The intracoronary administration of Abciximab was not superior to the intravenous administration of Eptifibatide in the STEMI patients who underwent primary PCI