Postdilatation after stent deployment during primary percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The utilization of postdilatation in primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is feared to induce suboptimal coronary blood flow and compromise the outcome of the patients. This meta-analysis sought to verify whether postdilatation during primary PCI is associated with worse angiographic or long-term clinical outcomes. METHODS: Systematic literature searches were conducted on PubMed, The Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, EBSCO, and Europe PMC on 10 March 2024. Eligible studies reporting the outcomes of postdilatation among ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients were included. The primary outcome was no-reflow condition during primary PCI based on angiographic finding. The secondary clinical outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) comprising all-cause death, myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization (TVR), and stent thrombosis. RESULTS: Ten studies were finally included in this meta-analysis encompassing 3280 patients, which was predominantly male (76.6%). Postdilatation was performed in 40.7% cases. Postdilatation was associated with increased risk of no-reflow during primary PCI [Odd Ratio (OR) = 1.33, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 1.12-1.58; P = .001)]. Conversely, postdilatation had a tendency to reduce MACE (OR = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.51-0.97; P = .03) specifically in terms of TVR (OR = 0.41, 95% CI: 0.22-0.74; P = .003). No significant differences between both groups in relation to mortality (OR = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.32-1.05; P = .07) and myocardial infarction (OR = 1.5, 95% CI: 0.78-2.89; P = .22). CONCLUSIONS: Postdilatation after stent deployment during primary PCI appears to be associated with an increased risk of no-reflow phenomenon after the procedure. Nevertheless, postdilatation strategy has demonstrated a significant reduction in MACE over the course of long-term follow-up. Specifically, postdilatation significantly decreased the occurrence of TVR. Key messages: What is already known on this topic?  Optimizing stent deployment by performing postdilatation during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is essential for long-term clinical outcomes. However, its application during primary PCI is controversial due to the fact that it may provoke distal embolization and worsen coronary blood flow. What this study adds?  In this systematic review and meta-analysis of 10 studies, we confirm that postdilatation during primary PCI is associated with worse coronary blood flow immediately following the procedure. On the contrary, this intervention proves advantageous in improving long-term clinical outcomes, particularly in reducing target vessel revascularization. How this study might affect research, practice, or policy?  Given the mixed impact of postdilatation during primary PCI, this strategy should only be applied selectively. Future research should focus on identifying patients who may benefit from such strategy.

Percutaneous transvenous mitral commissurotomy and transcatheter aortic valve replacement for rheumatic mitral and aortic stenosis.

The indications for transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) have been expanding; however, treatment protocol for patients with severe aortic stenosis with other significant valve disease is still controversial. Furthermore, there are few randomized data to guide therapy in multivalvular disease. We describe a successful percutaneous transvenous mitral commissurotomy and TAVR simultaneously. A 3-year follow-up echocardiography showed preserved valve function. Learning objective: A combination of percutaneous transvenous mitral commissurotomy and transcatheter aortic valve replacement for multivalvular disease with severe mitral stenosis and aortic stenosis may be a treatment option. For multivalvular disease, heart team decisions can be valuable for an optimal management strategy.

Improved clinical outcome with biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents compared to durable polymer drug-eluting stents for primary percutaneous coronary intervention.

BACKGROUND: Studies comparing the clinical outcomes of second-generation biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents (BP-DES) and second-generation durable polymer drug-eluting stents (DP-DES) in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) with follow-up duration of more than 1 year are still limited. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the 2-year clinical outcome of BP-DES with second-generation DP-DES in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI). METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study in patients with STEMI, the primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE) defined as recurrent myocardial infarction, total repeat revascularisation and cardiac death. The secondary endpoint was stent thrombosis (ST) defined as definite, probable or possible. RESULTS: A total of 400 patients were analysed (197 BP-DES groups and 203 DP-DES groups). BP-DES were independently associated with lower incidence of MACE (adjusted HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.91, p=0.005) and ST (adjusted HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.73, p<0.016) within 2 years of follow-up. Subgroup analysis of MACE individual components showed that BP-DES were associated with lower cardiac deaths (HR 0.35; 95% CI 0.18 to 0.94; p<0.001) compared to DP-DES, but not recurrent myocardial infarction and total repeat revascularisation. CONCLUSIONS: BP-DES were associated with better clinical outcomes compared to second-generation DP-DES in patients with STEMI undergoing PPCI.

Comparison between radial versus femoral percutaneous coronary intervention access in Indonesian hospitals, 2017-2018: A prospective observational study of a national registry.

BACKGROUND: Coronary heart disease is a leading cause of death in Indonesia and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is a routinely performed procedure. The aim of this study is to provide real-world insight on the demographics of coronary artery disease and comparison between radial compared to femoral PCI in Indonesia, which performed radial access whenever possible. METHODS: This is a prospective cohort study involving 5420 patients with coronary artery disease who underwent PCI at 9 participating centers in the period of January 2017-December 2018. RESULTS: Radial access rate was performed in 4038 (74.5%) patients. Patients receiving femoral access has a higher rate of comorbidities and complex lesions compared to radial access. The incidence of in-hospital mortality, cardiogenic shock, major arrhythmia, and tamponade were higher in femoral group. The incidence of in-hospital mortality was 114 (2.1%). New-onset angina (OR 3.412), chronic renal failure (OR 3.47), RBBB (OR 4.26), LBBB (OR 6.26), left main stenosis PCI (OR 3.58), cardiogenic shock (OR 4.9), and arrhythmia (OR 15.59) were found to be independent predictors of in-hospital mortality. Radial access did not independently affect in-hospital mortality. In propensity-matched cohort, radial access was not associated with lower in-hospital mortality in both bivariable and multivariable model. However, radial access was associated with reduced in-hospital mortality in STEMI subgroup (OR 0.31). CONCLUSION: Higher rate of adverse events was noted on the femoral access group. However, it might stem from the fact that patients with more comorbidities and complex lesions are more likely to be assigned to femoral access-group. Neither radial or femoral access is superior in terms of in-hospital mortality upon propensity-score matching/multivariable analysis.

A Randomized Comparison between Everolimus-Eluting Stent and Cobalt Chromium Stent in Patients with Acute ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Using Routine Intravenous Eptifibatide: The X-MAN (Xience vs. Multi-Link Stent in Acute Myocardial Infarction) Trial, A Pilot Study.

The objective of this study is to determine the efficacy and safety of an everolimus-eluting stent (EES/Xience; Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA) compared with a cobalt chromium stent (CoCr/Multi-Link Vision; Abbott Vascular) in patients with acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with routine administration of eptifibatide infusion. This is a prospective, single center, randomized trial comparing EES (n = 75) and CoCr stent (n = 75) implantation in patients with acute STEMI undergoing primary PCI. Intravenous eptifibatide administration was mandatory by protocol in this pilot study. The primary efficacy endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at 30 days, defined as the composite of death, reinfarction, and target vessel revascularization. Secondary safety endpoints were stent thrombosis at 30 days and in-hospital bleeding event. Acute reperfusion parameters were also assessed. One-month MACE rate did not differ between EES and CoCr group (1.3 vs. 1.3%, p = 1.0). No stent thrombosis cases were observed in the EES group. The groups did not differ with respect to in-hospital bleeding events (5 vs. 9%, p = 0.37), achievement of final thrombolysis in myocardial infarction flow 2 or 3 (p = 0.21), achievement of myocardial blush grade 2 or 3 (p = 0.45), creatine kinase-MB level at 8 to 12 hours after stenting (p = 0.29), and left ventricular ejection fraction (p = 0.21). This pilot study demonstrates that after one-month follow-up, the use of EES is as safe and effective as the use of CoCr stents in patients with acute STEMI undergoing primary PCI with routine administration of intravenous eptifibatide.

A 2-h diagnostic protocol to assess patients with chest pain symptoms in the Asia-Pacific region (ASPECT): a prospective observational validation study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chest pain contribute substantially to emergency department attendances, lengthy hospital stay, and inpatient admissions. A reliable, reproducible, and fast process to identify patients presenting with chest pain who have a low short-term risk of a major adverse cardiac event is needed to facilitate early discharge. We aimed to prospectively validate the safety of a predefined 2-h accelerated diagnostic protocol (ADP) to assess patients presenting to the emergency department with chest pain symptoms suggestive of acute coronary syndrome. METHODS: This observational study was undertaken in 14 emergency departments in nine countries in the Asia-Pacific region, in patients aged 18 years and older with at least 5 min of chest pain. The ADP included use of a structured pre-test probability scoring method (Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction [TIMI] score), electrocardiograph, and point-of-care biomarker panel of troponin, creatine kinase MB, and myoglobin. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events within 30 days after initial presentation (including initial hospital attendance). This trial is registered with the Australia-New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, number ACTRN12609000283279. FINDINGS: 3582 consecutive patients were recruited and completed 30-day follow-up. 421 (11.8%) patients had a major adverse cardiac event. The ADP classified 352 (9.8%) patients as low risk and potentially suitable for early discharge. A major adverse cardiac event occurred in three (0.9%) of these patients, giving the ADP a sensitivity of 99.3% (95% CI 97.9-99.8), a negative predictive value of 99.1% (97.3-99.8), and a specificity of 11.0% (10.0-12.2). INTERPRETATION: This novel ADP identifies patients at very low risk of a short-term major adverse cardiac event who might be suitable for early discharge. Such an approach could be used to decrease the overall observation periods and admissions for chest pain. The components needed for the implementation of this strategy are widely available. The ADP has the potential to affect health-service delivery worldwide. FUNDING: Alere Medical (all countries), Queensland Emergency Medicine Research Foundation and National Health and Medical Research Council (Australia), Christchurch Cardio-Endocrine Research Group (New Zealand), Medquest Jaya Global (Indonesia), Science International (Hong Kong), Bio Laboratories Pte (Singapore), National Heart Foundation of New Zealand, and Progressive Group (Taiwan).