The impact of circadian variation on outcomes in emergency acute anterior myocardial infarction percutaneous coronary intervention.

OBJECTIVES: We investigated the impact of primary coronary angioplasty performed during night and compared to the impact of that performed during day-time on outcomes of patients with acute ST elevation anterior wall myocardial infarction (AMI). METHODS: We prospectively followed 273 consecutive patients of whom 160 (58.6%) were treated during day time (8:00 a.m. to 6 p.m.) and 113 (41.4%) were treated "off hours"/at night (6 p.m. to 8 a.m.). Baseline demographics, angiographic factors, and clinical outcomes (death, recurrent AMI, and need for repeat revascularization) were compared between the groups. RESULTS: Baseline clinical characteristics were similar between the two groups. Unadjusted mortality at one-month was significantly higher among patients who were treated during night compared with those treated at day-time (9.7% vs. 3.1% P = 0.03), as was adverse cardiac event rate (15.9% vs. 6.9%; P = 0.02). Multiple logistic regression analysis adjusted for the CADILLAC risk score demonstrated that this score, which includes baseline LVEF, renal failure, Killip class, final TIMI flow, age>65 years, anemia, and the number of coronary vessel diseases, is a significant predictor of one-month mortality, while the effect of time of treatment was borderline (night vs. day; odds ratio 2.7; 95% confidence interval, 0.8-9.4; P = 0.095). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study indicate that patients with anterior myocardial infarction treated during night time have worse unadjusted short-term clinical outcomes despite no delay from onset of symptoms to actual treatment. Larger studies are needed in order to identify potential contributors to this phenomenon.

Coronary bifurcation lesions: to stent one branch or both?

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate two different stent placement techniques for bifurcation lesions: 1) stenting of the main branch and balloon dilatation of the sidebranch versus 2) stenting of both branches. BACKGROUND: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of coronary bifurcation lesions remains challenging, and limited information is available regarding whether stent placement is necessary in both branches of the bifurcation using bare-metal stents. Methods. We prospectively followed all patients who underwent PCI for symptomatic bifurcation lesions at our center. All patients were carefully followed for subsequent clinical events. RESULTS: Between March 2001 and November 2002, a total of 50 patients were treated with either stenting of both vessels (double stent group; n = 32) or stenting of the parent vessel and balloon angioplasty of the sidebranch (single stent group; n = 18). Optimal angiographic success was 87.5% in the single stent group and 100% in the double stent group (p = 0.1). The post-procedure percent diameter stenosis of the sidebranch vessel was significantly higher in the single stent group (18 +/- 25% versus 4 +/- 8%; p = 0.005). At 6 months, the incidence of clinically driven repeat target lesion revascularization was 37.6% with 2 stents as compared to 5.6% using 1 stent (p = 0.01). Angiographic restenosis was documented in 40.6% using 2 bifurcation stents, as compared to 11% when using 1 stent (p = 0.05). By multivariable analysis adjusted for baseline differences, stenting the sidebranch was a borderline predictor for major adverse cardiac events at 6 months (odds ratio = 10.3; 95% confidence interval, 0.9-116; p = 0.053). CONCLUSION: For the treatment of true bifurcation lesions, a strategy of stenting both vessels using bare metal stents seems to be associated with worse long-term results, as compared to stenting only the parent vessel.

Comparison of outcomes up to six months of Heparin-Coated with noncoated stents after percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction.

We prospectively followed 238 patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention for acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction and compared the outcomes of patients who received heparin-coated stents (n = 124) with those of patients who received noncoated stents (n = 114). The clinical characteristics and adjunctive medications of the 2 groups were similar. The use of heparin-coated stents was associated with improved 30-day outcome but had no significant effect on 180-day outcome.