Intracoronary pharmacotherapy in the management of coronary microvascular dysfunction

Prevention of medical malpractice and disputes through analysis of lawsuits related to coronary angiography and intervention

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Possible fatal complications arising from coronary angiography (CAG), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and coronary artery disease itself, are likely to cause medical disputes. Presenting the current status and reasons for judgments given in lawsuits related to CAG/PCI, this study aimed to identify ways to prevent unnecessary disputes and medical malpractice suits related to CAG/PCI through lawsuit analysis.

METHODS

A total of 13 cases (20 judgments) found in the Supreme Court of Korea's Written Judgment Management System from 1998 to 2017 were analyzed.

RESULTS

Coronary artery injury was the most common causative complication that led to lawsuits (n = 6, 46%). Six cases (46%) were ruled in favor of the plaintiff for violation of duty of care (n = 4) and duty of explanation (n = 2), respectively. Cases that violated duty of care included two errors in intra-procedure device manipulation, one in pre-procedure diagnosis, and one in management of post-procedure complication. Lack of explanation regarding the risk of complications was pointed out in both cases that violated duty of explanation. The average awarded amount for the damages was 114,436,064 Korean won.

CONCLUSION

Physicians need not fear unfair judgments so long as they follow standard of care because the Court consistently looked at the probability, the foreseeability, and the evidence. Therefore, maintaining standard of care is important. Besides, specific, detailed, and comprehensible explanations, including the risk of complications in addition to the necessity of procedures, are important to ensure the patient clearly understands the possible risk of adverse outcomes.

A Practical Approach to the Management of Complications During Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Percutaneous coronary intervention relieves symptoms in patients with chronic ischemic heart disease resistant to optimal medical therapy and alters the natural history of acute coronary syndromes. However, adverse procedural outcomes may occur during the intervention. Knowledge of possible complications and their timely management are essential for the practicing cardiologist and can be life-saving for the patient. In this review, the authors summarize potential complications of percutaneous coronary intervention focusing on their practical management.

Adenosine and verapamil for no-reflow during primary percutaneous coronary intervention in people with acute myocardial infarction

BACKGROUND

Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) is the preferred treatment for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Although coronary flow is restored after PPCI, impaired myocardial perfusion (known as no-reflow) related to poor clinical outcomes is frequently observed. To overcome this phenomenon, drugs, such as atorvastatin, abciximab and others, have been tried as adjunctive treatment to PPCI. Among these drugs, verapamil and adenosine are among the most promising. No other systematic reviews have examined use of these two drugs in people with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) undergoing PPCI. This is an update of the version previously published (2013, Issue 6), for which the people of interest in the review were those treated with PPCI - not those given fibrinolytic therapy.

OBJECTIVES

To study the impact of adenosine and verapamil on no-reflow during PPCI in people with AMI.

SEARCH METHODS

We updated searches of the following databases in June 2014 without language restriction: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and BIOSIS, China National Knowledge Infrastructure and clinical trials registers (ClinicalTrials.gov, Current Controlled Trials, Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform). We also handsearched The American Journal of Cardiology.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in which adenosine or verapamil was the primary intervention. Participants were individuals diagnosed with AMI who were undergoing PPCI.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors collected studies and extracted data. When necessary, we contacted trial authors to obtain relevant information. We calculated risk ratios (RRs), P values and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of dichotomous data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included in our review 11 RCTs (one new study with 59 participants) involving 1027 participants. Ten RCTs were associated with adenosine and one with verapamil. We considered the overall risk of bias of included studies to be moderate. We found no evidence that adenosine reduced short-term all-cause mortality (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.48, P value = 0.27), long-term all-cause mortality (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.22 to 2.74, P value = 0.70), short-term non-fatal myocardial infarction (RR 1.32, 95% 0.33 to 5.29, P value = 0.69) or myocardial blush grade (MBG) 0 to 1 after PPCI (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.22, P value = 0.75). The incidence of thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow grade < 3 after PPCI (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.91, P value = 0.01) was decreased. Conversely, adverse events with adenosine, such as bradycardia (RR 6.32, 95% CI 2.98 to 13.41, P value < 0.00001), hypotension (RR 11.43, 95% CI 2.75 to 47.57, P value = 0.0008) and atrioventricular (AV) block (RR 6.78, 95% CI 2.15 to 21.38, P value = 0.001), were significantly increased.Meta-analysis of verapamil as treatment for no-reflow during PPCI was not performed because data were insufficient.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

It is difficult to draw conclusions because of the insufficient quality and quantity of current research studies. We considered the overall risk of bias of included studies to be moderate. Adenosine as treatment for no-reflow during PPCI could reduce angiographic no-reflow (TIMI flow grade < 3) but was found to increase adverse events. What's more, no evidence could be found to suggest that adenosine reduced all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction or the incidence of myocardial blush grade 0 to 1. Additionally, the efficacy of verapamil for no-reflow during PPCI could not be analysed because data were insufficient. Further clinical research into adenosine and verapamil is needed because of the limited numbers of available trials and participants.

The REFLO-STEMI trial comparing intracoronary adenosine, sodium nitroprusside and standard therapy for the attenuation of infarct size and microvascular obstruction during primary percutaneous coronary intervention: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Microvascular obstruction (MVO) secondary to ischaemic-reperfusion injury is an important but underappreciated determinant of short- and longer-term outcome following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) treatment of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Several small studies have demonstrated a reduction in the degree of MVO utilising a variety of vasoactive agents, with adenosine and sodium nitroprusside (SNP) being most evaluated. However, the evidence base remains weak as the trials have had variable endpoints, differing drug doses and delivery. As such, the results regarding benefit are conflicting.

METHODS

The REperfusion Facilitated by LOcal adjunctive therapy in STEMI (REFLO-STEMI) trial is a multicentre, prospective, randomised, controlled, open label, study with blinded endpoint analysis: Patients presenting within 6 h of onset of STEMI and undergoing planned primary PCI (P-PCI) with TIMI 0/1 flow in the infarct-related artery (IRA) and no significant bystander coronary artery disease on angiography, are randomised into one of three groups: PCI with adjunctive pharmacotherapy (intracoronary adenosine or SNP) or control (standard PCI). All receive Bivalirudin anticoagulation and thrombus aspiration. The primary outcome is infarct size (IS) (determined as a percentage of total left ventricular mass) measured by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMRI) undertaken at 48 to 72 h post P-PCI. Secondary outcome measures include MVO (hypoenhancement within infarct core) on CMRI, angiographic markers of microvascular perfusion and MACE during 1-month follow-up. The study aims to recruit 240 patients (powered at 80% to detect a 5% absolute reduction in IS).

DISCUSSION

The REFLO-STEMI study has been designed to address the weaknesses of previous trials, which have collectively failed to demonstrate whether adjunctive pharmacotherapy with adenosine and/or SNP can reduce measures of myocardial injury (infarct size and MVO) and improve clinical outcome, despite good basic evidence that they have the potential to attenuate this process. The REFLO-STEMI study will be the most scientifically robust trial to date evaluating whether adjunctive therapy (intracoronary adenosine or SNP following thrombus aspiration) reduces CMRI measured IS and MVO in patients undergoing P-PCI within 6 h of onset of STEMI.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Trial registered 20th November 2012: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01747174.

Angiographic outcomes with early eptifibatide therapy in non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (from the EARLY ACS Trial)

Early administration of glycoprotein IIbIIIa inhibitors results in improved angiographic parameters, including thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow grade, corrected TIMI frame count, and TIMI myocardial perfusion grade (TMPG) among patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Whether the same is true in the setting of non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome is unknown. The goal of the early glycoprotein IIbIIIa inhibition in non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (EARLY ACS) angiographic substudy was to compare angiographic outcomes among patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome who were administered early routine versus delayed provisional eptifibatide. Of 9,406 patients in the EARLY ACS trial, 2,066 patients were included in the angiographic substudy (early routine eptifibatide [n=1,042] or early placebo [n=1,024] with delayed provisional eptifibatide after angiography and before percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI]). The angiographic substudy primary end point was the incidence of TMPG 3 before and after PCI. TMPG 3 before (43.7% vs 44.9%, p=0.58) and after PCI (52.4% vs 50.1%, p=0.73) was similar for early routine versus delayed provisional eptifibatide, respectively. Angiographic procedural complications consisting of a composite of loss of side branch, abrupt vessel closure, distal embolization, and no reflow occurred less frequently in early routine group versus delayed provisional group (9.3% vs 13.6%, respectively, p=0.01). In the EARLY ACS angiographic substudy, the use of early routine eptifibatide resulted in fewer angiographic procedural complications. These data provide support for the use of eptifibatide in the catheterization laboratory during high-risk cases merely to prevent angiographic procedural complications.

Adenosine and verapamil for no-reflow during primary percutaneous coronary intervention in people with acute myocardial infarction

BACKGROUND

Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) is the preferred treatment for ST segment elevation myocardial infarction. Although there is restoration of coronary flow after PPCI, impaired myocardial perfusion (known as no-reflow) is frequently observed, and is related to poor clinical outcomes. In order to overcome this phenomenon, drugs have been tried as adjunctive treatments to PPCI. Among them, verapamil and adenosine are two of the most promising drugs. There are no systematic reviews of these two drugs in people with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) undergoing PPCI.

OBJECTIVES

To study the impact of adenosine and verapamil on people with AMI who are undergoing PPCI.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases in February 2012: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) on The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and BIOSIS, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Clinical Trials registers (Clinical Trials.gov, Current Controlled Trials, Australian & New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform). We also handsearched the American Journal of Cardiology.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs) where adenosine or verapamil was the primary intervention. Participants were individuals diagnosed with AMI who were undergoing PPCI.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors collected studies and extracted data. Where necessary, we contacted the trial authors to obtain the relevant information. We calculated risk ratios (RRs), P values, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of dichotomous data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 RCTs involving 939 participants in our review. Nine RCTs were associated with adenosine and one with verapamil. We considered the overall risk of bias of included studies to be moderate. There was no evidence that adenosine reduced short-term all-cause mortality (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.61, P = 0.32), long-term all-cause mortality (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.27 to 5.22, P = 0.81), short-term non-fatal myocardial infarction (RR 1.38, 95% 0.28 to 6.96, P = 0.69) or the incidence of angiographic no-reflow (TIMI flow grade < 3 after PPCI: RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.07, P = 0.11, and myocardial blush grade (MBG) 0 to 1 after PPCI: RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.22, P=0.75). But the incidence of adverse events with adenosine, such as bradycardia (RR 6.57, 95% CI 2.94 to 14.67, P<0.00001), hypotension (RR 11.43, 95% CI 2.75 to 47.57, P=0.0008) and atrioventricular (AV) block (RR 6.67, 95% CI 1.52 to 29.21, P=0.01) was significantly increased.Meta-analysis of verapamil as treatment for no-reflow during PPCI was not calculated due to lack of data.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence that adenosine and verapamil as treatments for no-reflow during PPCI can reduce all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction or the incidence of angiographic no-reflow (TIMI flow grade < 3 and MBG 0 to1), but there was some evidence of increased adverse events. Further clinical research into adenosine and verapamil is needed because of the limited numbers of included trials and participants.

Cardiogenic Shock in Women

Cardiogenic shock (CS) describes the physiologic state in which reduced cardiac output and resultant tissue hypoxia occur in the presence of adequate intravascular volume. Among patients hospitalized with myocardial infarction (MI), CS is the foremost cause of death. Women are more susceptible to CS than men in the setting of ST segment increase MI. Introduction of early revascularization strategies and mechanical ventricular support have seen a decrease in short-term mortality from CS. However, the prognosis following CS remains poor. This article examines the prevalence, causes, pathophysiology, and therapeutic options for CS among women.

Rationale and design of the INFUSE-AMI study: A 2 × 2 factorial, randomized, multicenter, single-blind evaluation of intracoronary abciximab infusion and aspiration thrombectomy in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for anterior ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction

BACKGROUND

Whether thrombus aspiration and local glycoprotein IIb/IIIa administration reduce infarct size in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has not been established in multicenter studies.

DESIGN

INFUSE-AMI is a multicenter, open-label, controlled, single-blind randomized study enrolling 452 subjects with anterior STEMI and an occluded proximal or mid-left anterior descending artery with thrombosis in myocardial infarction 0, 1, or 2 grade flow undergoing primary PCI with bivalirudin anticoagulation. Subjects are randomized in a 2 × 2 factorial to one of the following 4 arms: (1) local infusion of abciximab using the ClearWay RX Local Therapeutic Infusion Catheter (ClearWay, Atrium Medical Corp, Hudson, NH) after aspiration with a 6F Export Aspiration Catheter (Medtronic, Inc, Minneapolis, MN), (2) local infusion of abciximab using the ClearWay RX Infusion Catheter and no aspiration, (3) no local infusion of abciximab and aspiration with a 6F Export Aspiration Catheter, or (4) no local infusion of abciximab and no aspiration. The primary end point is infarct size (percentage of total left ventricular mass) at 30 days measured by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. Other secondary end points include microvascular obstruction by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging at 5 days, ST-segment resolution, angiographic myocardial perfusion, thrombus burden, angiographic complications, and clinical events through 1-year follow-up. Safety end points include major and minor bleeding.

SUMMARY

INFUSE-AMI is testing the hypothesis that the intracoronary administration of an abciximab bolus with or without thrombus aspiration before stent implantation compared to no infusion with or without thrombus aspiration reduces infarct size among patients undergoing primary PCI for anterior STEMI who are treated with bivalirudin.