A comparative analysis of direct stenting versus deferred stenting for the treatment of elderly patients with acute ST segment elevation myocardial infarction with a high thrombus load / 中华老年医学杂志

ABSTRACT

Objective:To compare the safety and effectiveness of direct stenting versus deferred stenting for the treatment of acute ST segment elevation myocardial infarction(STEMI)with a high thrombus load in patients aged 60 years and above.Methods:In this study, we analyzed 252 elderly STEMI patients with a high thrombus load(thrombus score ≥ 4 points)who received percutaneous coronary intervention(PCI)at Beijing Anzhen Hospital Affiliated or at the Affiliated Hospital of Beihua University from January 2015 to December 2018.They were divided into the direct stent group(n = 126)and the deferred stent group(n = 126)according to whether the stent was inserted immediately or not.Baseline information, surgical information, clinical outcomes and major adverse cardiac events were compared between the two groups at 1 year follow-up.Cox regression analysis was used to determine whether deferred stent implantation was a prognostic factor.Results:There were no significant differences in the distribution of infarct-related arteries, time from onset to balloon dilatation, thrombus load scores and the number of stents between the two groups(all P> 0.05). The diameter and length of the stent were(3.20 ± 0.47)mm and(18.33 ± 5.06)mm in the deferred stent group and(3.03 ± 0.50)mm and(22.60 ± 5.08)mm in the direct stent group, respectively, with a significant difference between the two groups( t=2.926, 6.678, P=0.004, 0.000). The incidences of slow blood flow, distal embolism and low myocardial perfusion staining in the deferred stent group were 2.38%(3/126), 3.17%(4/126)and 2.38%(3/126), respectively, significantly lower than those in the direct stent group, which were 15.87%(20/126), 24.60%(31/126)and 20.63%(26/126), respectively( χ2=13.827, 24.188, 20.614, all P=0.000). The left ventricular ejection fraction(LVEF)at 1 year in the deferred stent group was (0.60±0.05)%, significantly higher than that in the direct stent group(0.57±0.05)%( t=3.859, P=0.000). There was no significant difference in major adverse cardiac events between the two groups at 1 year follow-up( P> 0.05). Cox regression analysis results showed that deferred stent implantation was not a factor affecting the clinical outcome( HR=0.827, 95% CI 0.288~2.372, P=0.724). Conclusions:Deferred stent implantation and direct stent intervention are equally safe and effective for STEMI patients aged over 60 with a high thrombus load if admitted to the hospital within 12 hours after onset.Deferred stent implantation can significantly improve the infarct-related artery blood flow classification, reduce the distal embolism rate, increase the grade 3 rate of myocardial perfusion staining, increase the diameter of the stent, reduce the length of the stent and improve left ventricular ejection fraction.