Pharmacologic Prevention of Myocardial Ischemia-Reperfusion Injury in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

ABSTRACT

Establishing efficient perfusion into the myocardium is the main purpose in patients with acute coronary syndrome, but the process of reperfusion is not without risk and can damage the myocardium paradoxically. Unfortunately, there is no effective treatment for reperfusion injury, and efforts to find an efficient preventive approach are still ongoing. In the past 3 decades, there have been many successful animal studies on how to prevent reperfusion injury; nonetheless, translation to the clinical setting has almost always proven disappointing. In this article, we review clinical studies on the prevention of reperfusion injury in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention in a pharmacologic-based approach. We categorize all the agents that are evaluated for the prevention of myocardial reperfusion injury based on their mechanisms of action into 5 groups: drugs that can reduce oxidative stress, drugs that can affect cellular metabolism, rheological agents that target microvascular obstruction, anti-inflammatory agents, and agents with mixed mechanisms of action. Then, review all the clinical studies of these agents in the setting of primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Finally, we will discuss the possible reasons for the failure in translation of studies into practice and propose potential solutions to overcome this problem.

Reperfusion injury in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: the final frontier

ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction is a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Reperfusion injury (RI) following the opening of an occluded coronary artery mitigates the effect of reperfusion by further accentuating ischemic damage and increasing infarct size. Experimental studies have shown that nearly 50% of final infarct size is attributable to RI, an elusive phenomenon that remains resistant to treatment. This review proposes a hypothesis to explain the failure of strategies that have been used in an attempt to prevent RI. This hypothesis suggests that, after a certain duration of myocardial ischemia in the affected myocardium, three phases of myocardial damage occur: reversible ischemia, irreversible ischemia, and necrosis. In the reversible ischemia phase, cellular adaptive responses remain functional, and cellular repair and thus recovery of cellular functions is possible, whereas in the irreversible ischemia phase protective maneuvers fail to confer cytoprotection. Preventive therapies for RI fail because they cannot prevent cell death once cells have entered the irreversible ischemia phase, although they may succeed in postponing cell death. Failure to salvage myocardium with irreversible ischemia in addition to postponement and change in the mode of cell death (mainly from necrosis to apoptosis) by various RI preventive strategies may be the key to understanding the failure of these strategies in the clinical setting, despite their success in the reduction of infarct size in the experimental setting. Early reperfusion before large amounts of myocardium at risk reach the stage of irreversible ischemia is the best strategy for reduction of RI-related myocardial damage.

Reperfusion Damage - A Story of Success, Failure, and Hope

Tissue salvage of severely ischemic myocardium requires timely reperfusion by thrombolysis, angioplasty, or bypass. However, recovery of left ventricular function is rare. It may be absent or, even worse, reperfusion can induce further damage. Laboratory studies have shown convincingly that reperfusion can increase injury over and above that attributable to the pre-existing ischemia, precipitating arrhythmias, suppressing the recovery of contractile function ("stunning") and possibly even causing cell death in potentially salvable ischemic tissue. The mechanisms of reperfusion injury have been widely studied and, in the laboratory, it can be attenuated or prevented. Disappointingly, this is not the case in the clinic, particularly after thrombolysis or primary angioplasty. In contrast, excellent results have been achieved by surgeons by means of cardioplegia and hypothermia. For the interventionist, the issue is more complex as, contrary to cardiac surgery where the cardioplegia can be applied before ischemia and the heart can be stopped, during an angioplasty the heart still has to beat to support the circulation. We analyze in detail all these issues.