Direct Stenting versus Conventional Stenting in Patients with ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction-A COMPARE CRUSH Sub-Study

BACKGROUND

Direct stenting (DS) compared with conventional stenting (CS) after balloon predilatation may reduce distal embolization during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), thereby improving tissue reperfusion. In contrast, DS may increase the risk of stent underexpansion and target lesion failure.

METHODS

In this sub-study of the randomized COMPARE CRUSH trial (NCT03296540), we reviewed the efficacy of DS versus CS in a cohort of contemporary, pretreated ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients undergoing primary PCI. We compared DS versus CS, assessing (1) stent diameter in the culprit lesion, (2) thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow in the infarct-related artery post-PCI and complete ST-segment resolution (STR) one-hour post-PCI, and (3) target lesion failure at one year. For proportional variables, propensity score weighting was applied to account for potential treatment selection bias.

RESULTS

This prespecified sub-study included 446 patients, of whom 189 (42%) were treated with DS. Stent diameters were comparable between groups (3.2 ± 0.5 vs. 3.2 ± 0.5 mm, p = 0.17). Post-PCI TIMI 3 flow and complete STR post-PCI rates were similar between groups (DS 93% vs. CS 90%, adjusted OR 1.16 [95% CI, 0.56-2.39], p = 0.69, and DS 72% vs. CS 58%, adjusted OR 1.29 [95% CI 0.77-2.16], p = 0.34, respectively). Moreover, target lesion failure rates at one year were comparable (DS 2% vs. 1%, adjusted OR 2.93 [95% CI 0.52-16.49], p = 0.22).

CONCLUSION

In this contemporary pretreated STEMI cohort, we found no difference in early myocardial reperfusion outcomes between DS and CS. Moreover, DS seemed comparable to CS in terms of stent diameter and one-year vessel patency.

CVIT expert consensus document on primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) update 2022

Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) has significantly contributed to reducing the mortality of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) even in cardiogenic shock and is now the standard of care in most of Japanese institutions. The Task Force on Primary PCI of the Japanese Association of Cardiovascular Interventional and Therapeutics (CVIT) society proposed an expert consensus document for the management of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) focusing on procedural aspects of primary PCI in 2018. Updated guidelines for the management of AMI were published by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) in 2017 and 2020. Major changes in the guidelines for STEMI patients included: (1) radial access and drug-eluting stents (DES) over bare-metal stents (BMS) were recommended as a Class I indication, (2) complete revascularization before hospital discharge (either immediate or staged) is now considered as Class IIa recommendation. In 2020, updated guidelines for Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (NSTEMI) patients, the followings were changed: (1) an early invasive strategy within 24 h is recommended in patients with NSTEMI as a Class I indication, (2) complete revascularization in NSTEMI patients without cardiogenic shock is considered as Class IIa recommendation, and (3) in patients with atrial fibrillation following a short period of triple antithrombotic therapy, dual antithrombotic therapy (e.g., DOAC and single oral antiplatelet agent preferably clopidogrel) is recommended, with discontinuation of the antiplatelet agent after 6 to 12 months. Furthermore, an aspirin-free strategy after PCI has been investigated in several trials those have started to show the safety and efficacy. The Task Force on Primary PCI of the CVIT group has now proposed the updated expert consensus document for the management of AMI focusing on procedural aspects of primary PCI in 2022 version.

Effects of Peripheral Arterial Disease Interventions on Survival: A Propensity-Score Matched Analysis Using VQI Data

BACKGROUND

Atherectomy is currently being used extensively for occlusive peripheral artery disease (PAD) interventions without proven benefits. This analysis examines the effects of atherectomy and other endovascular interventions on patient survival.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study is to compare overall survival for patients undergoing PAD endovascular interventions, such as plain old balloon angioplasty (POBA), stent deployment and atherectomy.

METHODS

Propensity score matched cohorts were constructed to conduct pairwise comparisons of overall survival in patients who underwent stenosis and occlusive PAD interventions between May 2011 and February 2020 using Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) regional registry data. Inverse probability treatment weighting method was used to compare secondary outcomes of in-hospital mortality, length of stay, complications and major amputations. Comparative analysis was performed for POBA vs stenting, POBA vs atherectomy, and stenting vs atherectomy.

RESULTS

A total number of 15281 eligible cases were identified. After propensity score matching, 6094, 4032, and 3312 cases were used to compare POBA versus stent deployment, POBA versus atherectomy and stent versus atherectomy, respectively. Stent deployment had significantly better overall survival compared with POBA and atherectomy (P < 0.001). Multivariable Cox proportional hazard models suggested stenting was associated with a reduction in mortality hazard by 30% compared with POBA (HR: 0.7; 95% CI: 0.6-0.82; P < 0.001) and a 40% mortality reduction compared with atherectomy (HR: 0.6; 95% CI: 0.48-0.75; P < 0.001). No significant difference was found between POBA and atherectomy. There was no statistical difference in other secondary outcomes which were comparable among all cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Stent deployment was significantly superior to POBA and atherectomy in terms of overall survival with comparable complication and amputation rates. The natural history of PAD patients presenting with claudication is associated with an extremely low annual mortality risk. Therefore, further examinations of outcomes, especially in regards to mortality rates, both POBA and atherectomy on the management of PAD patients especially those presenting with claudication is warranted.

Comparison of direct stenting with conventional strategy on myocardial impairments in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a cardiac magnetic resonance imaging study

Direct stenting (DS) without pre-dilatation of the culprit lesion might improve myocardial perfusion and prognosis in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI); however, some studies report conflicting results. We investigated whether DS provides incremental myocardial benefits over conventional stenting (CS) in STEMI patients based on cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) measures. Reperfused patients who underwent CMR examinations within 1 week of STEMI onset were selected from a multicenter CMR registry of STEMI (NCT: 03768453). Patients were stratified into either a DS or CS group. Each group comprised 137 patients after 1:1 propensity score matching. Major adverse events (MACEs), including death, myocardial re-infarction, re-admission for heart failure, and stroke were noted during a median period of 44 months (interquartile range 32-58 months). DS was associated with larger (p = 0.007) and shorter (p = 0.005) stent sizes than CS. DS and CS achieved comparable angiographic TIMI-3 flow grades (p = 0.86) and myocardial blush grades (p = 0.70). There were no group differences regarding the incidence of CMR manifestations of microvascular dysfunction, including microvascular obstruction (MVO) (p = 0.89) and intramyocardial hemorrhage (p = 0.47), the extent of MVO (p = 0.21), infarction size (p = 0.83), or left ventricular ejection fraction (p = 0.57). Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed similar risks of MACEs (log rank p = 0.909), which occurred in 23.4% of DS and 26.3% of CS patients (p = 0.576). DS did not show any incremental benefits over CS on myocardial impairments as evaluated using CMR.Clinical Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT: 03768453.

Impact of direct stenting on clinical outcomes for small vessel coronary artery disease in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction

Introduction

Direct stenting (DS) is associated with improved markers of reperfusion during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) for ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). However, data evaluating its impact in small vessel coronary artery disease (CAD) are lacking.

Aim

To compare DS and conventional stenting (CS) for small vessel CAD on clinical outcomes of patients with STEMI undergoing PPCI.

Material and methods

A cohort of 616 STEMI patients treated with DS (202 patients) or CS (414 patients) in small vessel (≤ 2.75 mm) lesions was retrospectively analyzed. The primary endpoint was to compare the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) between groups during 2-year follow-up. The secondary end points included in-hospital target lesion revascularization (TLR) and in-hospital death.

Results

The primary end-point, MACEs, occurred in 9.2% in the DS group and 12.3% in the CS group (p > 0.05). The rates of TLR, myocardial infarction (MI) and target vessel revascularization (TVR) were not significantly different between groups (p > 0.05). The stent thrombosis (ST) rate was significantly lower in the DS group (1.0% vs. 4.2%, p = 0.04) at 2 years. However, DS was not found to be an independent predictor of ST in multivariate analysis. There were no significant differences in in-hospital rates of death and TLR. The DS compared to CS resulted in greater rates of postprocedural TIMI grade 3 flow, and lower risk of edge dissection. The procedure time, radiation exposure and contrast administration were found to be significantly lower in the DS group.

Conclusions

In selected patients with STEMI undergoing PPCI for small vessel CAD, DS is not only safe and feasible but also reduces ST rates, contrast load, and procedural and radiation exposure time.

Clinical impact of direct stenting and interaction with thrombus aspiration in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: Thrombectomy Trialists Collaboration

Aims

Preliminary studies suggest that direct stenting (DS) during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) may reduce microvascular obstruction and improve clinical outcome. Thrombus aspiration may facilitate DS. We assessed the impact of DS on clinical outcome and myocardial reperfusion and its interaction with thrombus aspiration among ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients undergoing PCI.

Methods and results

Patient-level data from the three largest randomized trials on routine manual thrombus aspiration vs. PCI only were merged. A 1:1 propensity matched population was created to compare DS and conventional stenting. Synergy between DS and thrombus aspiration was assessed with interaction P-values in the final models. In the unmatched population (n = 17 329), 32% underwent DS and 68% underwent conventional stenting. Direct stenting rates were higher in patients randomized to thrombus aspiration as compared with PCI only (41% vs. 22%; P < 0.001). Patients undergoing DS required less contrast (162 mL vs. 172 mL; P < 0.001) and had shorter fluoroscopy time (11.1 min vs. 13.3 min; P < 0.001). After propensity matching (n = 10 944), no significant differences were seen between DS and conventional stenting with respect to 30-day cardiovascular death [1.7% vs. 1.9%; hazard ratio 0.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55-1.41; P = 0.60; Pinteraction = 0.96) and 30-day stroke or transient ischaemic attack (0.6% vs. 0.4%; odds ratio 1.02; 95% CI 0.14-7.54; P = 0.99; Pinteraction = 0.81). One-year results were similar. No significant differences were seen in electrocardiographic and angiographic myocardial reperfusion measures.

Conclusion

Direct stenting rates were higher in patients randomized to thrombus aspiration. Clinical outcomes and myocardial reperfusion measures did not differ significantly between DS and conventional stenting and there was no interaction with thrombus aspiration.

Long-term clinical outcomes of direct absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation in acute coronary syndrome

BACKGROUND

Preferred technique for bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) implantation included high pressure predilation. Data about direct BVS implantation in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients are scarce.

METHODS

Analysis of 90 consecutive patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI) treated with primary PCI with Absorb deployment between 2013-2016 in a single center. In 45 patients, scaffolds were implanted in the direct technique, other 45 patients underwent Absorb deployment after balloon predilation.

RESULTS

Follow-up was available in 100% of patients with mean duration of 32±11 months. No cardiac death or scaffold thrombosis were observed in both groups. In the direct group, no target lesion revascularization (TLR) was reported. In the predilation arm, TLR occurred in 4 (9%) patients (P=0.12). Target vessel revascularization (TVR) was observed in 1 (2%) case in the direct group and in 6 (13%) patients from the predilation group (P=0.11). Target vessel MI was reported in one patient from each group. In an intention to treat analysis, we observed significantly higher rates of TVR (15% vs. 2%; P<0.043) and TLR (10% vs. 0%; P=0.038) in the predilation arm. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis did not show significant differences in TLR, TVR and device oriented composite endpoint (a combination of cardiac death, target vessel MI and ischemia driven TLR) between patients treated with both methods.

CONCLUSIONS

Direct Absorb implantation in patients with ACS may be feasible and safe.

Angiographically Based Direct Implantation of the Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold in Non-ST Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome: Feasibility and Outcome

BACKGROUND:

Direct implantation of metallic drug-eluting stents is recommended for lesions with high thrombotic burden; however, this can’t be applied to bioresorbable scaffold for which adequate lesion preparation is recommended.

AIM:

We aimed at assessing the feasibility and safety of direct scaffold implantation based only on angiographic assessment in patients presented with non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndrome.

METHODS:

The study was a retrospective two-centre study conducted over patients diagnosed with NSTE-ACS presented to cardiology department at Juan Ramon Hospital, Spain and critical care department, Cairo University in the period between February 2016 to May 2017. We included patients for whom we depend only on angiographic assessment for decision making whether to directly implant the scaffold or predilate the lesion and we excluded patients for whom intracoronary imaging was used at the index procedure either for pre or post-implantation. The primary outcome of interest was the device-oriented composite endpoints (DOCE) including cardiac death, and MI attributed to the target vessel and TLR. The secondary endpoints were the broader patient-oriented composite outcome (POCE) and scaffold/stent thrombosis. POCE includes all-cause mortality, any MI and any revascularisation (including TLR, TVR and revascularisation of non- target vessel)

RESULTS:

Among 46 patients with NSTE-ACS treated with BVS, we did direct implantation in 20 patients (group A), and we used pre dilatation in 26 patients (group B). The two groups have similar demographics and clinical criteria. Procedural success was obtained in all study population. Mean follow up duration was 12 months. We have total of 10% device-oriented composite endpoints in group A versus 15% in group B (p-value = 0.684). We didn’t document any cardiac death in both groups. In group B we had one (3.8%) non-fatal MI while there was no MI in group A (P-value = 1). In group A we had 2 cases (10%) of TLR while in group B there were 3 cases (11.5%) TLR (P-value = 1). We have two cases (7.7%) of TVR in group B and one in group A p-value = 1. All cases were planned staged PCI. Scaffold thrombosis occurred in one case in group A (5%) and two cases in group B (7.7%) p-value = 1.

CONCLUSION:

With proper lesion selection, direct BVS implantation in all-comers NSTE-ACS patients is feasible and safe even without the aid of intracoronary imaging.

[Association of Strategy of Direct Stenting of Infarct-Related Artery with Reduction of Mortality in Woman with ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction]

Aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of direct stenting (DS) strategy on the results of treatment of female patients with STelevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Among 1297 patients with STEMI admitted to the coronary care unit and subjected to PCIs from 2006 to 2015 there were 330 women (25.4 %). Data from 161 women (48.8 %) who underwent DS were compared with those from 169 women who underwent indirect stenting (IS). Among patients of IS group in 148 (87.6 %) stenting was performed after predilation, in 7 (4.1 %) after manual thrombus aspiration, and in 14 (8.3 %) after combination of predilation and thrombus aspiration.

RESULTS

The rate of angiographic success was higher in the DS group (97.5 vs. 87.6 %, р&lt;0.001). Rates of deaths (4.3 vs. 11.8 %; p=0.013), major adverse cardiac events (MACE)(4.3 vs. 13 %; p=0.005), and no-reflow (1.9 % vs. 11.2 %; p=0.013) were significantly lower in the DS group. There were no differences in rates of recurrent myocardial infarction and access site complications. Following propensity score matching, each group contained 78 patients. Rates of MACE (2.6 vs. 14.1 %; p=0.009) and deaths (2.6 vs. 12.8 %; p=0.016) remained significantly lower in the DS group. After multivariate adjustment, DS strategy was independently associated with lower mortality (odds ratio [OR] 0.29; 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.09-0.97; p=0.04) and MACE (OR=0.28; 95 %CI 0.09-0.087; p=0.03).

CONCLUSION

DS strategy in STEMI female patients turned out to be safe and effective technique.

Impact of direct stenting on myocardial injury assessed by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and prognosis in ST-elevation myocardial infarction

BACKGROUND

The results of studies investigating the clinical benefit of a direct stenting (DS) strategy in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) are inconsistent and data regarding cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) parameters of myocardial injury are lacking. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of DS on myocardial damage in comparison to a conventional stenting technique (CS) with predilation in patients with reperfused STEMI.

METHODS

In a subanalysis of the randomized LIPSIA CONDITIONING trial (NCT02158468), STEMI patients were stratified according to the percutaneous coronary intervention technique into the DS (n = 171) or CS (n = 171) group after matching the patients for age (±5 years), gender, and TIMI flow before coronary intervention. Patients underwent CMR imaging within one week after infarction. Clinical outcome (death, reinfarction, hospitalization for heart failure) was assessed within 6 months after the index event.

RESULTS

Patients in the DS group had significantly lower infarct size (16 vs. 19% of left ventricular mass; p = 0.046) and microvascular obstruction with significant improvement of left ventricular parameters, which was associated with favorable clinical outcome with a lower incidence of heart failure hospitalizations (4% vs. 11%, p = 0.011) and mortality (5% vs. 12%, p = 0.034) as compared to patients with CS. In multivariate Cox regression analysis, DS was identified as an independent predictor of reduced mortality (HR 0.30, 95% CI 0.11-0.87, p = 0.026).

CONCLUSION

In patients with acute reperfused STEMI, DS is safe and feasible with a significant reduction of infarct size compared to CS and subsequent lower incidence of heart failure hospitalizations and mortality.

Deflated Balloon-Facilitated Direct Stenting in Primary Angioplasty (The DBDS Technique): A Pilot Study

Background

Several studies and meta-analyses have shown that direct stenting (DS) may improve clinical outcomes in patients with acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). But in most cases, the thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow remains ≤ 1 after wire placement. We used deflated balloon to facilitate DS in patients with totally occluded culprit arteries. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility, safety and outcomes of this novel technique in patients with STEMI in real-world clinical practice.

Methods

This was a prospective, observational, single-center pilot study. From September 2016 to June 2018, 454 patients were enrolled in the study. DS was performed when the culprit vessel was visualized with at least TIMI flow grade 1. Patients with complete occlusion of the vessel after wire placement were subjected to deflated balloon-facilitated DS technique (DBDS technique) and DS was done wherever possible.

Results

DS was done in 74% (n = 336) of the patients and 26% (n = 118) patients received stenting after pre-dilatation (PD). DBDS technique to facilitate DS was successful in 68% patients (211/309). Final TIMI 3 flow was achieved more frequently in the DS group as compared to PD group (96.7% versus 92.3%, P = 0.04). The procedural complications were also significantly lower in DS group (0.6% versus 7.6%, P < 0.001). DS group had significantly lower procedure time (33 ± 19 min versus 41 ± 17 min, P < 0.001), fluoroscopy time (6.2 ± 3.4 min versus 7.8 ± 32 min, P < 0.001), required lesser contrast volume (112 ± 16 mL versus 123 ± 18 mL, P < 0.001) and had lower procedural cost (310 ± 45$ versus 402 ± 56$, P < 0.001). ST-segment resolution > 50% after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were significantly higher in the DS group (85.7% versus 71.1%, P < 0.001). At 30 days, the major adverse cardiac event (MACE) rate was significantly lower in the DS group (2.4% versus 9.3%, P = 0.02), mainly driven by lower rates of target lesion revascularization (TLR) (0.9% versus 4.2%, P = 0.01).

Conclusion

This cost-effective technique appears to be simple, feasible and safe and is associated with superior clinical outcomes. It helps in maximizing DS and could offer an alternative to PD and aspiration thrombectomy in total occlusion. However, larger studies with longer follow up are required before a wider application of this technique.

Role of ST-Segment Resolution in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Treated With Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (from the 5-Year Outcomes of the EXAMINATION [Evaluation of the Xience-V Stent in Acute Myocardial Infarction] Trial)

In patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI), lack of ST-segment resolution (STR) is associated with poor prognosis at short- and long-term follow-up. The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of STR on very long-term outcomes in patients with STEMI treated with pPCI included in the EXAMINATION (Evaluation of the Xience-V Stent in Acute Myocardial Infarction) trial. Patients were stratified according to the presence of STR < 50% and STR < 70% at the 30-minute post-pPCI electrocardiogram. Primary end point was the patient-oriented composite endpoint (POCE) of all-cause death, any myocardial infarction, or any revascularization at 5-year follow-up. Both baseline and post-PCI 30-minute electrocardiograms were available for STR assessment in 1,351 patients. Of these patients, 228 (16.9%) and 500 (37.0%) exhibited STR < 50% and STR < 70%, respectively. At 5-year follow-up, the POCE was observed more frequently in patients with STR < 50% (hazard ratio [HR] 1.556; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.194 to 2.027; p <0.001) and in patients with STR < 70% (HR 1.460, 95% CI 1.169 to 1.824, p <0.001) compared with patients with STR > 50% and STR ≥ 70%, respectively. In both cases, this difference was mainly driven by a significant increase in the rate of all-cause death and any revascularization. After multivariable adjustment, STR < 70%, but not STR < 50%, resulted as a 5-year independent predictor of POCE (adjusted HR 1.338, 95% CI 1.008 to 1.778, p = 0.044). In conclusion, in patients with STEMI, the evaluation of 70% STR after pPCI provides independent prognostic information at 5-year follow-up and it can be used to identify patients at high risk of very long-term cardiovascular events.

CVIT expert consensus document on primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in 2018

While primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has significantly contributed to improve the mortality in patients with ST segment elevation myocardial infarction even in cardiogenic shock, primary PCI is a standard of care in most of Japanese institutions. Whereas there are high numbers of available facilities providing primary PCI in Japan, there are no clear guidelines focusing on procedural aspect of the standardized care. Whilst updated guidelines for the management of acute myocardial infarction were recently published by European Society of Cardiology, the following major changes are indicated; (1) radial access and drug-eluting stent over bare metal stent were recommended as Class I indication, and (2) complete revascularization before hospital discharge (either immediate or staged) is now considered as Class IIa recommendation. Although the primary PCI is consistently recommended in recent and previous guidelines, the device lag from Europe, the frequent usage of coronary imaging modalities in Japan, and the difference in available medical therapy or mechanical support may prevent direct application of European guidelines to Japanese population. The Task Force on Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention of the Japanese Association of Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics (CVIT) has now proposed the expert consensus document for the management of acute myocardial infarction focusing on procedural aspect of primary PCI.

Emergency coronary angioplasty with stenting using Cordis® diagnostic coronary catheters when there is difficulty in engaging guide catheters and bench evaluation of diagnostic and guide catheters

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS

Difficulty in engaging with guide catheters is not uncommon in acute emergencies. We aimed to evaluate the use of Cordis^® INFINITI diagnostic catheters to perform angioplasty in patients in whom the coronaries cannot be engaged using standard guide catheters.

METHODS

In 34 cases of acute coronary syndrome, when difficulty in engagement with two standard guide catheters was encountered with reasonable manipulations, angioplasty was performed using diagnostic catheters. In total, 40 stents were placed by this technique. Pushability and trackability, distal tip flexion and three-point bending tests were performed to evaluate the performance of the guide and diagnostic catheters.

RESULTS

Angioplasty was performed easily in a setting where it would have been very difficult to perform. Coronary dissection occurred in one patient, treated by a stent. The stent and dilatation balloons were easily passed through the diagnostic catheters. Pressure tracings were clearly preserved with certain stent delivery systems, and at angioplasty, although there was slightly reduced opacification of the respective artery, the coronary anatomy was sufficiently visualized to perform angioplasty. No periprocedural target lesion complications were seen in any cases. Pushability and trackability tests showed good force transmission along a tortuous path with diagnostic catheters, and balanced force-displacement curves from three-point bending tests and distal tip softness tests.

CONCLUSION

Angioplasty with stenting can be performed safely through 6F Cordis^® infiniti diagnostic catheters when difficulty in engaging guide catheters is encountered.

Mechanical strategies to enhance myocardial salvage during primary percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with STEMI

Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) has become the mainstay of reperfusion therapy in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Despite timely reperfusion by PPCI and restoration of epicardial blood flow in up to 95% of patients, tissue reperfusion remains suboptimal in a sizeable proportion of patients with STEMI. Over the years mechanical and pharmacological strategies to enhance myocardial salvage during PPCI have been developed and used in patients with STEMI. The most common mechanical strategies used in the setting of PPCI include: coronary stenting, direct stenting, mesh-covered stents, self-expanding stents, deferred stenting, thrombectomy, distal protection devices, intra-aortic balloon pumping, left ventricular assist devices and ischaemic conditioning. These strategies are thought to enhance myocardial salvage via improving acute procedural success, attenuation of distal embolisation, microvascular obstruction and reperfusion injury, and providing haemodynamic support. Coronary (direct) stenting is almost the default approach of reperfusion during PPCI procedures. Evidence on the use of mesh-covered stents, self-expanding stents, deferred stenting or left ventricular assist devices is scant and their use in the setting of PPCI remains limited. Mechanical thrombectomy, distal protection devices or routine intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation seem to offer no clinical benefit when used in the setting of PPCI. Although manual aspiration may improve indices of tissue reperfusion, recent research showed no clinical benefit of routine use of this strategy in patients with STEMI undergoing PPCI. Ischaemic conditioning, although promising, remains at an investigational stage and needs further research.

Short-term outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndrome treated with direct bioresorbable scaffold deployment

BACKGROUND

Direct coronary stenting is a validated therapeutic option for coronary lesions. We studied the feasibility of direct deployment with a bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) in acute coronary syndrome (ACS).

METHODS

Demographic, procedural, and survival data were obtained for patients who had direct scaffold deployment with BVS from 1 May 2013 to 1 April 2014.

RESULTS

We performed a retrospective review of nine patients which included eight patients having ST-elevation myocardial infarction. There were no cases of worsening coronary flow, scaffold thrombosis, target lesion revascularization or death up to 30 days post intervention.

CONCLUSION

Direct BVS deployment in ACS appears safe and feasible.

Comparing Direct Stenting With Conventional Stenting in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes

Our aim was to compare direct stenting (DS) with conventional stenting (CS) in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and ISI web of science for eligible studies. Primary end point was major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) in short term. Secondary end points were 1-year mortality and after-procedural no-reflow phenomenon. Twelve trials in 8998 patients were included. The odds ratios (ORs) were pooled using the Mantel-Haenszel fixed effect model. Short-term MACEs were significantly reduced in the DS arm in contrast to the CS (5.00% vs 8.08%, DS vs CS, respectively, OR [95% confidence interval] = 0.61 [0.46-0.80], P = .0004). One-year mortality and after-procedural no-reflow phenomenon were significantly lower in the DS group. No heterogeneity was observed through I2 test ( Phet = .81, .89, and .77 for each end point, respectively). This meta-analysis demonstrated that in selected patients with ACS, DS is not only safe and feasible but also reduces short-term and 1-year mortality as well as the occurrence of after-procedural no-reflow phenomenon.