Adenosine as adjunctive therapy in acute coronary syndrome: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

AIMS

Adenosine has been tested in several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to minimize the incidence of coronary microvascular obstruction (CMVO). The aim of this study was to pool all the RCTs comparing intracoronary or intravenous adenosine versus placebo in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing myocardial revascularization.

METHODS AND RESULTS

PubMed and Scopus electronic databases were scanned for eligible studies up to 5th June 2022. A total of 26 RCTs with 5843 patients were included. Efficacy endpoints were major adverse cardiac events (MACE), all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and heart failure. Atrioventricular blocks and ventricular fibrillation/sustained ventricular tachycardia (VF/SVT) were the safety endpoints. Myocardial blush grade, thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow grade, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), infarct size, and ST-segment resolution were also assessed. Adenosine administration was not associated with any clinical benefit in terms of MACE, all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and heart failure. However, adenosine was associated with an increased rate of advanced atrioventricular blocks and of VF/SVT in studies with total mean ischaemic time >3 h, compared to placebo. Remarkably, among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, adenosine was associated with reduced myocardial blush grade 0-1 and TIMI flow grade 0-2, compared to placebo. Furthermore, adenosine did not show favourable effects on LVEF and infarct size.

CONCLUSION

Adenosine infusion, as adjunctive therapy in ACS, was associated with an increased risk of advanced atrioventricular blocks and increased rates of adenosine-triggered ventricular arrhythmias in patients with long ischaemic time, without providing any clinical benefit compared to placebo.

Endless Journey of Adenosine Signaling in Cardioprotective Mechanism of Conditioning Techniques: Clinical Evidence

Myocardial ischemic injury is a primary cause of death among various cardiovascular disorders. The condition occurs due to an interrupted supply of blood and vital nutrients (necessary for normal cellular activities and viability) to the myocardium, eventually leading to damage. Restoration of blood supply to ischemic tissue is noted to cause even more lethal reperfusion injury. Various strategies, including some conditioning techniques, like preconditioning and postconditioning, have been developed to check the detrimental effects of reperfusion injury. Many endogenous substances have been proposed to act as initiators, mediators, and end effectors of these conditioning techniques. Substances, like adenosine, bradykinin, acetylcholine, angiotensin, norepinephrine, opioids, etc., have been reported to mediate cardioprotective activity. Among these agents, adenosine has been widely studied and suggested to have the most pronounced cardioprotective effects. The current review article highlights the role of adenosine signaling in the cardioprotective mechanism of conditioning techniques. The article also provides an insight into various clinical studies that substantiate the applicability of adenosine as a cardioprotective agent in myocardial reperfusion injury.

Clinical benefit of adenosine as an adjunct to reperfusion in ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients: An updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Adenosine administered as an adjunct to reperfusion can reduce coronary no-reflow and limit myocardial infarct (MI) size in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients. Whether adjunctive adenosine therapy can improve clinical outcomes in reperfused STEMI patients is not clear and is investigated in this meta-analysis of 13 randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

We performed an up-to-date search for all RCTs investigating adenosine as an adjunct to reperfusion in STEMI patients. We calculated pooled relative risks using a fixed-effect meta-analysis assessing the impact of adjunctive adenosine therapy on major clinical endpoint including all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and heart failure. Surrogate markers of reperfusion were also analyzed.

RESULTS

13 RCTs (4273 STEMI patients) were identified and divided into 2 subgroups: intracoronary adenosine versus control (8 RCTs) and intravenous adenosine versus control (5 RCTs). In patients administered intracoronary adenosine, the incidence of heart failure was significantly lower (risk ratio [RR] 0.44 [95% CI 0.25-0.78], P=0.005) and the incidence of coronary no-reflow was reduced (RR for TIMI flow<3 postreperfusion 0.68 [95% CI 0.47-0.99], P=0.04). There was no difference in heart failure incidence in the intravenous adenosine group but most RCTs in this subgroup were from the thrombolysis era. There was no difference in non-fatal MI or all-cause mortality in both subgroups.

CONCLUSION

We find evidence of improved clinical outcome in terms of less heart failure in STEMI patients administered intracoronary adenosine as an adjunct to reperfusion. This finding will need to be confirmed in a large adequately powered prospective RCT.

Impact of intracoronary adenosine administration during primary PCI: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Aim of the present study was to evaluate all randomized trials, comparing intracoronary adenosine versus placebo in STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI.

METHODS AND RESULTS

PubMed, the Cochrane Library and ISI Web of Knowledge electronic databases were scanned for eligible studies up to February 23rd 2015. The summary measure used was risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals. A total of 13 studies were eligible, including 1487 patients. Incidence of ST resolution was significantly higher in the IC adenosine group than in the placebo group (RR = 1.20 [1.05–1.38]; p = 0.008). At metaregression, a significant correlation was found between the magnitude of the adenosine-related effect on ST resolution and the mean ischemic time (p = 0.011) or the percentage of patients with the LAD as the infarct-related artery (p = 0.03). Furthermore, we found a larger increase in LVEF (p = 0.02) with a parallel reduction in the incidence of heart failure (HF) (RR = 0.50 [0.28–0.89]; p = 0.02) in the IC adenosine group. Finally, IC adenosine administration was associated with a significantly lower incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) both at short- (RR = 0.62 [0.39–0.98] p = 0.04) and long-term (RR = 0.61 [0.39–0.95] p = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first meta-analysis demonstrating a clinical benefit for IC adenosine in hard endpoints, such as adverse cardiovascular events, in patients undergoing primary PCI.

Efficacy of Adenosine in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A PRISMA-Compliant Meta-Analysis

Whether adenosine offers cardioprotective effects when used as an adjunctive therapy for patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains controversial.To evaluate, via meta-analysis, the efficacy of adenosine in patients with AMI undergoing PCI.Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials.RCTs of patients with AMI undergoing primary PCI, comparing adenosine treatment and placebo groups and reporting mortality, thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow grade, myocardial blush grade (MBG), re-infarction, left-ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), ST-segment elevation resolution (STR), recurrent angina, or heart failure (HF).Risk of bias was assessed by the Cochrane guidelines and publication bias by Egger's test. For studies reported in multiple publications, the most complete publication was used. Arms using different dosing schedules were merged. Mean differences (MDs) or risk ratios (RRs) were determined.Data were extracted from 15 RCTs involving 1736 patients. Compared with placebo, adenosine therapy was associated with fewer occurrences of heart failure (RR: 0.65, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.43-0.97, P[REPLACEMENT CHARACTER]=[REPLACEMENT CHARACTER]0.03) and no-reflow (TIMI flow grade <3, RR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.45-0.85, P[REPLACEMENT CHARACTER]=[REPLACEMENT CHARACTER]0.003; MBG[REPLACEMENT CHARACTER]=[REPLACEMENT CHARACTER]0-1, RR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.67-0.98, P[REPLACEMENT CHARACTER]=[REPLACEMENT CHARACTER]0.03), more occurrences of STR (RR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.07-1.31, P[REPLACEMENT CHARACTER]<[REPLACEMENT CHARACTER]0.00001), but no overall improvement of LVEF (MD: 2.29, 95% CI: -0.09 to 4.67, P[REPLACEMENT CHARACTER]=[REPLACEMENT CHARACTER]0.06). Adenosine improved LVEF in the intravenous subgroup and the regular-dose intracoronary (IC) subgroup (0.24-2.25[REPLACEMENT CHARACTER]mg) compared with placebo (MD: 2.68, 95% CI: 0.66-4.70, P[REPLACEMENT CHARACTER]=[REPLACEMENT CHARACTER]0.009). Adenosine was associated with a poorer LVEF in the high-dose (4-6[REPLACEMENT CHARACTER]mg) IC subgroup (MD: -2.40; 95% CI: -4.72 to -0.09, P[REPLACEMENT CHARACTER]=[REPLACEMENT CHARACTER]0.04). There was no significant evidence that adenosine reduced rates of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality or re-infarction after PCI.Adenosine dosage and administration routes, baseline profiles, and endpoints differed among included RCTs. Performance, publication, and reporting biases remain possible.Adenosine therapy appears to improve several outcomes in patients with AMI after PCI, but there is no evidence that adenosine can reduce mortality rates.

ST elevation myocardial infarction: recent advances and updates

ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) remains a leading cause of morbidity, mortality and disability worldwide. Statistically, a trend towards improvements in morbidity and mortality has been consistent over the years, which is attributed primarily to the modification of risk factors, healthier lifestyles, treatment advances and better management of door-to-balloon times via STEMI systems. However, a major challenge in the coming years will be the baby boomers (born between the years 1946 and 1964) coming into old age. The first baby boomers turned 65 in year 2011. As the baby boomers age in the coming years, the incidence of coronary heart disease is likely to increase, and so there will be a greater need to have major advances in the management of coronary heart disease in order to deal with this additional incidence. The scope of this article is to review recent advances in the management of STEMI and to provide an updated overview.