Background The benefit/risk ratio of stenting in acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction （STEMI） patients with single vessel intermediate stenosis culprit lesions merits further study, therefore the subject...Background The benefit/risk ratio of stenting in acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction （STEMI） patients with single vessel intermediate stenosis culprit lesions merits further study, therefore the subject of the present study. Methods and results It was a pro- spective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial. Between April 2012 and July 2015, 399 acute STEMI patients with single vessel disease and intermediate （40%-70%） stenosis of the culprit lesion before or after aspiration thrombectomy and/or intracoronary tirofiban （15 pg/kg） were enrolled and were randomly assigned （h 1） to stenting group （n = 201） and non-stenting group （n = 198）. In stenting group, patients received pharmacologic therapy plus standard percutaneous coronary intervention （PCI） with stent implantation. In non-stenting group, pa- tients received pharmacologic therapy and PCI （thrombectomy）, but without dilatation or stenting. Primary endpoint was 12-month rate of major adverse cardiac and eerebrovascular events （MACCE）, a composite of cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction （M1）, repeat re- vascularization and stroke. Secondary endpoints were 12-month rates of all cause death, ischemia driven admission and bleeding complica- tion. Median follow-up time was 12.4 ~ 3.1 months. At 12 months, MACCE occurred in 8.0% of the patients in stenting group, as compared with 15.2% in the non-stenting group （adjusted HR： 0.42, 95% Ch 0.19-0.89, P = 0.02）. The stenting group had lower non-fatal MI rate than non-stenting group, （1.5% vs. 5.5%, P = 0.03）. The two groups shared similar cardiac death, repeat revascularization, stroke, all cause death, ischemia driven readmission and bleeding rates at 12 months. Conclusions Stent implantation had better efficacy and safety in reducing MACCE risks among acute STEMI patients with single vessel intermediate stenosis culprit lesions.展开更多
Objective To explore the impact of a ＂one-week＂ staged muhivessel percutaneous coronary intervention （PCI） versus culprit-only PCI on deaths and major adverse cardiac events （MACE）. Methods We retrospectively an...Objective To explore the impact of a ＂one-week＂ staged muhivessel percutaneous coronary intervention （PCI） versus culprit-only PCI on deaths and major adverse cardiac events （MACE）. Methods We retrospectively analyzed 447 patients with multivessel disease who experienced a ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction （STEMI） within 12 h before undergoing PCI between July 26, 2008 and Septem- ber 25, 201 l. After completion of PCI in the infarct artery, 201 patients still in the hospital agreed to undergo PCI in non-infarct arteries with more than 70% stenosis for a ＂one-week＂ staged multivessel PCI. A total of 246 patients only received intervention for the culprit vessel. Follow-up ended on September 9, 2014. This study examined the differences in deaths from any cause （i.e., cardiac and noncardiac） and MACE between the two treatment groups. Results Compared to a culprit-only PCI treatment approach, the ＂one-week＂ staged multivessel PCI was strongly associated with greater benefits for 55-month all cause death [41 （16.7%） vs. 13 （6.5%）, P = 0.004] and MACE [82 （33.3%） vs. 40 （19.9%）, P = 0.002] rates. In addition, there were significant differences in the number of myocardial infarctions [43 （17.5%） vs. 20 （10.0%）, P = 0.023], coronary-artery bypass grafting [CABG; 20 （8.1%） vs. 6 （3.0%）, P = 0.021], and PCI [31 （12.6%） vs. 12 （6.0%）, P - 0.018]. Patients undergoing culprit-only PCI compared to ＂one-week＂ PCI had the same number of stent thrombosis events [7 （2.8%） vs. 3 （1.5%）, P - 0.522]. Conclusions Compared to a culprit-only PCI treatment approach, ＂one-week＂ staged multi-vessel PCI was a safe and effective selection for STEMI and multi-vessel PCL展开更多
Background The clinical significance of complete revascularization for ST segment elevation myocardial infarction （STEMI） pa- tients during admission is still debatable. Methods A total of 1406 STEMI patients from t...Background The clinical significance of complete revascularization for ST segment elevation myocardial infarction （STEMI） pa- tients during admission is still debatable. Methods A total of 1406 STEMI patients from the Korean Myocardial Infarction Registry with multivessel diseases without cardiogenic shock who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention （PPCI） were analyzed. We used propensity score matching （PSM） to control differences of baseline characteristics between culprit only intervention （CP） and multivessel percutaneous coronary interventions （MP）, and between double vessel disease （DVD） and triple vessel disease （TVD）. The major adverse cardiac event （MACE） was analyzed for one year after discharge. Results TVD patients showed higher incidence of MACE （14.2% vs. 8.6%, P = 0.01）, any cause of revascularization （10.6% vs. 5.9%, P - 0.01）, and repeated PCI （9.5% vs. 5.7%, P = 0.02）, as compared to DVD patients during one year after discharge. MP reduced MACE effectively （7.3% vs. 13.8%, P = 0.03）, as compared to CP for one year, but all cause of death （1.6% vs. 3.2%, P= 0.38）, Ml （0.4% vs. 0.8%, P = 1.00）, and any cause ofrevascularization （5.3% vs. 9.7%, P = 0.09） were comparable in the two treatment groups. Conclusions STEMI patients with TVD showed higher rate of MACE, as compared to DVD MP performed during PPCI or ad hoc during admission for STEMI patients without cardiogenic shock showed lower rate of MACE in this large scaled database. Therefore, MP could be considered as an effective treatment option for STEMI patients without cardiogenic shock.展开更多
Ostial lesions present many challenges for percutaneous coronary intervention （PCI）. Coronary anomaly will further increase difficulties in performing PCI for the patient. We present such a case as ostial occlusion ...Ostial lesions present many challenges for percutaneous coronary intervention （PCI）. Coronary anomaly will further increase difficulties in performing PCI for the patient. We present such a case as ostial occlusion of an right coronary artery with high takeoff. A 77-year-old male was referred to our institution with a diagnosis of non-ST elevated acute myocardial infarction. Selective coronary angiography and nonselective ascending aortography could not identify the origin of the right coronary artery. Multi-slices computed tomography showed RCA ostial totally occluded. A successful PCI was performed and a perfect final result was achieved utilized with many tips and tricks, including buddy wtre technique and focused-force angloplasty（J Genatr Cardio12009, 6：189-192）.展开更多
文摘Background The benefit/risk ratio of stenting in acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction （STEMI） patients with single vessel intermediate stenosis culprit lesions merits further study, therefore the subject of the present study. Methods and results It was a pro- spective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial. Between April 2012 and July 2015, 399 acute STEMI patients with single vessel disease and intermediate （40%-70%） stenosis of the culprit lesion before or after aspiration thrombectomy and/or intracoronary tirofiban （15 pg/kg） were enrolled and were randomly assigned （h 1） to stenting group （n = 201） and non-stenting group （n = 198）. In stenting group, patients received pharmacologic therapy plus standard percutaneous coronary intervention （PCI） with stent implantation. In non-stenting group, pa- tients received pharmacologic therapy and PCI （thrombectomy）, but without dilatation or stenting. Primary endpoint was 12-month rate of major adverse cardiac and eerebrovascular events （MACCE）, a composite of cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction （M1）, repeat re- vascularization and stroke. Secondary endpoints were 12-month rates of all cause death, ischemia driven admission and bleeding complica- tion. Median follow-up time was 12.4 ~ 3.1 months. At 12 months, MACCE occurred in 8.0% of the patients in stenting group, as compared with 15.2% in the non-stenting group （adjusted HR： 0.42, 95% Ch 0.19-0.89, P = 0.02）. The stenting group had lower non-fatal MI rate than non-stenting group, （1.5% vs. 5.5%, P = 0.03）. The two groups shared similar cardiac death, repeat revascularization, stroke, all cause death, ischemia driven readmission and bleeding rates at 12 months. Conclusions Stent implantation had better efficacy and safety in reducing MACCE risks among acute STEMI patients with single vessel intermediate stenosis culprit lesions.
文摘Objective To explore the impact of a ＂one-week＂ staged muhivessel percutaneous coronary intervention （PCI） versus culprit-only PCI on deaths and major adverse cardiac events （MACE）. Methods We retrospectively analyzed 447 patients with multivessel disease who experienced a ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction （STEMI） within 12 h before undergoing PCI between July 26, 2008 and Septem- ber 25, 201 l. After completion of PCI in the infarct artery, 201 patients still in the hospital agreed to undergo PCI in non-infarct arteries with more than 70% stenosis for a ＂one-week＂ staged multivessel PCI. A total of 246 patients only received intervention for the culprit vessel. Follow-up ended on September 9, 2014. This study examined the differences in deaths from any cause （i.e., cardiac and noncardiac） and MACE between the two treatment groups. Results Compared to a culprit-only PCI treatment approach, the ＂one-week＂ staged multivessel PCI was strongly associated with greater benefits for 55-month all cause death [41 （16.7%） vs. 13 （6.5%）, P = 0.004] and MACE [82 （33.3%） vs. 40 （19.9%）, P = 0.002] rates. In addition, there were significant differences in the number of myocardial infarctions [43 （17.5%） vs. 20 （10.0%）, P = 0.023], coronary-artery bypass grafting [CABG; 20 （8.1%） vs. 6 （3.0%）, P = 0.021], and PCI [31 （12.6%） vs. 12 （6.0%）, P - 0.018]. Patients undergoing culprit-only PCI compared to ＂one-week＂ PCI had the same number of stent thrombosis events [7 （2.8%） vs. 3 （1.5%）, P - 0.522]. Conclusions Compared to a culprit-only PCI treatment approach, ＂one-week＂ staged multi-vessel PCI was a safe and effective selection for STEMI and multi-vessel PCL
文摘Background The clinical significance of complete revascularization for ST segment elevation myocardial infarction （STEMI） pa- tients during admission is still debatable. Methods A total of 1406 STEMI patients from the Korean Myocardial Infarction Registry with multivessel diseases without cardiogenic shock who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention （PPCI） were analyzed. We used propensity score matching （PSM） to control differences of baseline characteristics between culprit only intervention （CP） and multivessel percutaneous coronary interventions （MP）, and between double vessel disease （DVD） and triple vessel disease （TVD）. The major adverse cardiac event （MACE） was analyzed for one year after discharge. Results TVD patients showed higher incidence of MACE （14.2% vs. 8.6%, P = 0.01）, any cause of revascularization （10.6% vs. 5.9%, P - 0.01）, and repeated PCI （9.5% vs. 5.7%, P = 0.02）, as compared to DVD patients during one year after discharge. MP reduced MACE effectively （7.3% vs. 13.8%, P = 0.03）, as compared to CP for one year, but all cause of death （1.6% vs. 3.2%, P= 0.38）, Ml （0.4% vs. 0.8%, P = 1.00）, and any cause ofrevascularization （5.3% vs. 9.7%, P = 0.09） were comparable in the two treatment groups. Conclusions STEMI patients with TVD showed higher rate of MACE, as compared to DVD MP performed during PPCI or ad hoc during admission for STEMI patients without cardiogenic shock showed lower rate of MACE in this large scaled database. Therefore, MP could be considered as an effective treatment option for STEMI patients without cardiogenic shock.
文摘Ostial lesions present many challenges for percutaneous coronary intervention （PCI）. Coronary anomaly will further increase difficulties in performing PCI for the patient. We present such a case as ostial occlusion of an right coronary artery with high takeoff. A 77-year-old male was referred to our institution with a diagnosis of non-ST elevated acute myocardial infarction. Selective coronary angiography and nonselective ascending aortography could not identify the origin of the right coronary artery. Multi-slices computed tomography showed RCA ostial totally occluded. A successful PCI was performed and a perfect final result was achieved utilized with many tips and tricks, including buddy wtre technique and focused-force angloplasty（J Genatr Cardio12009, 6：189-192）.
