Intracoronary or intravenous abciximab after aspiration thrombectomy in patients with STEMI undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention.

OBJECTIVE: To test whether aspiration thrombectomy with intracoronary (IC) instead of intravenous (IV) administration of abciximab could reduce the no-reflow phenomenon in patients undergoing primary percutaneous intervention (PCI) for ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). BACKGROUND: Despite recanalisation with PCI, failure to restore microvascular flow may affect the prognosis of patients with STEMI. A combination of aspiration thrombectomy with IC abciximab may improve distal perfusion. METHODS: After aspiration thrombectomy during primary PCI for STEMI, 160 patients were randomly assigned to either an IV or IC abciximab bolus delivered through the aspiration catheter, both followed by a 12-hour IV abciximab infusion. RESULTS: ST-segment resolution ≥ 70% was achieved in 36 of 78 patients with IC versus 30 of 82 patients with IV abciximab (46.1 vs 36.6%, p = 0.368), and partial resolution in 28 of 78 versus 31 of 82 patients (35.9 vs 37.8%, p = 0.368). Postprocedural myocardial blush grade (MBG) 3 was obtained in 62.8 vs 63.4% (p = 0.235) and MBG ≥ 2 in 89.7 vs 81.7% (p = 0.148) of patients given IC and IV abciximab, respectively. There were three deaths in each group (3.8%). Major adverse cardiac events occurred in six of 78 patients given the IC and seven of 82 patients given the IV abciximab bolus (7.6 vs 8.5%, p = 0.410). One stroke occurred in each group, and two patients in the IC and nine in the IV group developed renal failure (2.5 vs 10.9%, p = 0.414). CONCLUSIONS: IC versus IV abciximab did not enhance myocardial reperfusion in non-selected patients with STEMI undergoing primary PCI after aspiration thrombectomy had successfully been performed.

Impact of platelet inhibition level on subsequent no-reflow in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND: High P2Y12 platelet reactivity (PR) level after primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) affects prognosis and may induce the no-reflow phenomenon. AIM: To investigate the role of PR in the genesis of microvascular obstruction. METHODS: Patients with STEMI undergoing PPCI within 12hours of symptoms onset were included prospectively. All patients received a 600mg clopidogrel-loading dose before PPCI and 250mg aspirin. PR was measured thereafter during PPCI while wiring the culprit lesion and before coronary dilatation, using the P2Y12 VerifyNow® assay. No-reflow was defined as ST-segment regression<50% observed 90minutes after PPCI. RESULTS: Between January 2014 and November 2015, 140 STEMI patients were included, and divided into two groups: a low PR group (LPR) defined as PR<209P2Y12 reaction units (PRU); and a high PR group (HPR) defined as PR≥209PRU. There were no differences in baseline characteristics between LPR and HPR groups, including age (57.8±11.9 vs. 59.4±13.2 years, respectively; P=0.44) and weight (76.1±15.1 vs. 74.8±10.9kg, respectively; P=0.55). Delay to revascularization was 270.1±175.5 vs. 295.6±206.2minutes (P=0.49) and time between clopidogrel-loading and PR measurement was 53±37 vs 65±54minutes (P=0.29) in the LPR and HPR groups, respectively. No-reflow was more frequent in the HPR group (44 [47.3%] vs. 9 [19.1%]; P=0.0012). Mean PR was higher in patients with no-reflow: 268.3±53 vs. 223.8±50.1 PRU (P=0.002). In multivariable analysis, HPR was an independent predictor of no-reflow. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.745 (0.654, 0.835); the cut-off value predicting no-reflow was 254PRU. CONCLUSION: High PR level measured at PPCI is independently associated with no-reflow.