Blog
About

1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Impact of Early Tirofiban Administration on Myocardial Salvage in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction Undergoing Infarct-Related Artery Stenting

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background/Aims: The timing of GpIIb/IIIa inhibitor administration may be important in achieving early epicardial and myocardial reperfusion. We evaluated the effect of early tirofiban on myocardial salvage and cardiovascular outcome in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) undergoing infarct-related artery stenting. Methods: Patients (n = 66) with a first AMI presenting <6 h from onset of symptoms were randomized to either early administration of tirofiban in the emergency room (n = 32) or later administration in the catheterization laboratory (n = 34) (tirofiban bolus dose of 10 µg/kg, followed by 0.15 µg/kg for 24 h). The primary end-point was the degree of myocardial salvage, determined by means of serial scintigraphic studies with technetium-99m sestamibi. Thirty-day major adverse cardiac events were also assessed. Results: There were no significant differences in patient characteristics or in their presentation. The mean door-to-balloon time was similar in both groups (43 ± 12 and 53 ± 9 min, p = 0.08). The early and late treatment groups received tirofiban 18 ± 4 and 52 ± 10 min after admission, respectively. Angiographic analysis revealed a higher initial frequency of TIMI grade 3 flow in the early group (31% vs. 12%, p = 0.04). Procedural success was achieved in all patients. Myocardial risk area were comparable between early and late treatment groups (35.6 ± 12.2% vs. 39.3 ± 14.0%, p = 0.6). Scintigraphic outcomes demonstrated a significant reduction in the final infarction size (11.8 ± 5.2% vs. 22.4 ± 6.2%, p = 0.01), and improvement in salvage index (0.68 ± 0.22 vs. 0.44 ± 0.18, p = 0.003) in favor of the early tirofiban group. The thirty-day composite end-point of death, recurrent MI or rehospitalization also favored the early group (6% early, 15% late, p = 0.06). Conclusion: Early tirofiban administration enhanced the degree of myocardial salvage and clinical outcome in patients with AMI undergoing infarct-related artery stenting.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 12

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Coronary stenting plus platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa blockade compared with tissue plasminogen activator in acute myocardial infarction. Stent versus Thrombolysis for Occluded Coronary Arteries in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction Study Investigators.

          Prevention of myocardial damage is the main goal of all reperfusion therapies in patients with acute myocardial infarction. The relative efficacy of various reperfusion strategies is under intensive investigation. We assessed whether coronary stenting combined with the blockade of platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptors produces a greater degree of myocardial salvage than fibrinolysis with an accelerated infusion of alteplase, a tissue plasminogen activator, in patients with acute myocardial infarction. A total of 140 patients were enrolled in the randomized trial; 71 were assigned to receive a stent plus abciximab, and 69 to receive intravenous alteplase. The primary end point was the degree of myocardial salvage, determined by means of serial scintigraphic studies with technetium Tc 99m sestamibi. The secondary end point was a composite of death, reinfarction, and stroke within six months after randomization. In the group that received a stent plus abciximab, the median size of the final infarct was 14.3 percent of the left ventricle (25th and 75th percentiles, 6.8 and 24.5 percent), as compared with a median of 19.4 percent (25th and 75th percentiles, 7.9 and 34.2 percent) in the alteplase group (P=0.02). This difference was due to the larger salvage index (the percentage of the left ventricle that was salvaged, divided by the percentage that was compromised by the initial perfusion defect) in the stent group: 0.57 (25th and 75th percentiles, 0.35 and 0.69), as compared with 0.26 (25th and 75th percentiles, 0.09 and 0.61; P<0.001). The cumulative incidence of death, reinfarction, or stroke at six months was lower in the stent group than in the alteplase group (8.5 vs. 23.2 percent. P=0.02; relative risk, 0.34; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.13 to 0.88). In patients with acute myocardial infarction, coronary stenting plus abciximab leads to a greater degree of myocardial salvage and a better clinical outcome than does fibrinolysis with a tissue plasminogen activator.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Coronary angioplasty with or without stent implantation for acute myocardial infarction. Stent Primary Angioplasty in Myocardial Infarction Study Group.

             O Madonna,  M Morice,  G Stone (1999)
            Coronary-stent implantation is frequently performed for treatment of acute myocardial infarction. However, few studies have compared stent implantation with primary angioplasty alone. We designed a multicenter study to compare primary angioplasty with angioplasty accompanied by implantation of a heparin-coated Palmaz-Schatz stent. Patients with acute myocardial infarction underwent emergency catheterization and angioplasty. Those with vessels suitable for stenting were randomly assigned to undergo angioplasty with stenting (452 patients) or angioplasty alone (448 patients). The mean (+/-SD) minimal luminal diameter was larger after stenting than after angioplasty alone (2.56+/-0.44 mm vs. 2.12+/-0.45 mm, P<0.001), although fewer patients assigned to stenting had grade 3 blood flow (according to the classification of the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction trial) (89.4 percent, vs. 92.7 percent in the angioplasty group; P=0.10). After six months, fewer patients in the stent group than in the angioplasty group had angina (11.3 percent vs. 16.9 percent, P=0.02) or needed target-vessel revascularization because of ischemia (7.7 percent vs. 17.0 percent, P<0.001). In addition, the combined primary end point of death, reinfarction, disabling stroke, or target-vessel revascularization because of ischemia occurred in fewer patients in the stent group than in the angioplasty group (12.6 percent vs. 20.1 percent, P<0.01). The decrease in the combined end point was due entirely to the decreased need for target-vessel revascularization. The six-month mortality rates were 4.2 percent in the stent group and 2.7 percent in the angioplasty group (P=0.27). Angiographic follow-up at 6.5 months demonstrated a lower incidence of restenosis in the stent group than in the angioplasty group (20.3 percent vs. 33.5 percent, P<0.001). In patients with acute myocardial infarction, routine implantation of a stent has clinical benefits beyond those of primary coronary angioplasty alone.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              TIMI Frame Count

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                CRD
                Cardiology
                10.1159/issn.0008-6312
                Cardiology
                S. Karger AG
                0008-6312
                1421-9751
                2006
                November 2006
                15 November 2006
                : 106
                : 4
                : 264-269
                Affiliations
                Siyami Ersek Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery Center, Istanbul, Turkey
                Article
                93408 Cardiology 2006;106:264–269
                10.1159/000093408
                16717465
                © 2006 S. Karger AG, Basel

                Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

                Page count
                Figures: 1, Tables: 4, References: 23, Pages: 6
                Categories
                Original Research

                Comments

                Comment on this article