Treatment of no-reflow phenomenon with verapamil after primary stent deployment during myocardial infarction

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.

Study of the possible medical and medication explanatory factors of angiographic outcomes in patients with acute ST elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous intervention

Background:

Myocardial blush grade (MBG), thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) and corrected TIMI frame count (cTFC) are indices of successful angiographic reperfusion. This study sought to determine the predictors of angiographically successful reperfusion including demographic, clinical and angiographic factors in patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI).

Materials and Methods:

A cross-sectional study of patients with a confirmed diagnosis of STEMI undergoing pPCI was designed. Eligible patients referring to a university heart center were enrolled in the study from March 2012 to December 2012. Successful epicardial reperfusion was defned as TIMI flow grade 3 or cTFC<= 28 frames and successful myocardial reperfusion as MBG 2 or 3.

Results:

The study population consisted of 100 patients, including 74 males and 26 females, with mean ± standard deviation age of 58.27 ± 11.60 years. Achieving open microvasculature (MBG 2/3) was positively associated with a history of nitrate intake (P = 0.03) and history of calcium channel blocker (CCB) intake (P = 0.005). Hyperglycemia was inversely associated with achieving a final cTFC ≤ 28 frames (r = −0.32, P = 0.001).

Conclusions:

Our findings suggest that patients with a history of nitrate and CCB intake had a higher likelihood of successful PCI. In addition, patients with a higher blood glucose level on admission may have a reduced rate of reperfusion success. Future studies with a larger sample size are recommended to investigate the significant relationships observed in this study.

Verapamil reverses myocardial no-reflow after primary percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute myocardial infarction

The present study evaluated the efficacy of intracoronary administration of verapamil to attenuate the no-reflow phenomenon following the primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with the ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction (STEMI). A total of 201 patients with STEMI who underwent primary PCI within 12 h from the beginning of the heart attack were included. The no-reflow phenomenon was defined as substantial coronary anterograde flow of TIMI ≤2. Verapamil (100-200 μg) was injected into coronary artery immediately after no-reflow; the coronary arteriography was repeated later. Hundred and ninety-eight patients with STEMI successfully underwent primary PCI, and 246 stents were implanted with the average of 1.2 stents per patient. No-reflow occurred in 25 out of 198 patients (12.6%). Twenty-one (84%) patients developed the flow of TIMI ≥3 after intracoronary administration of verapamil, as revealed by repeated coronary angiography. Two patients developed transient hypotension which normalized without treatment within 3-5 min. Three patients showed sinus bradycardia, in one patient there was transient II sinoatrial block, and one patient developed type 1 atrioventricular block. All adverse effects were alleviated after intravenous injection of atropine (0.5-1 mg). In conclusion, the no-reflow phenomenon following primary PCI in patients with STEMI is significantly improved by intracoronary administration of verapamil which is useful to reduce cardiovascular events during operation.

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.

The effects of prior calcium channel blocker therapy on creatine kinase-MB levels after percutaneous coronary interventions

Background:

Use of intracoronary calcium channel blockers (CCBs) during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has been shown to have favorable effects on coronary blood flow. We aimed to investigate the effects of CCBs administrated perorally on creatine kinase-MB (CK-MB) levels in patients undergoing elective PCI.

Methods:

A total of 570 patients who underwent PCI were evaluated for CK-MB elevation. Patients who were on CCB therapy when admitted to the hospital constituted the CCB group. No CCBs were given to the rest of the patients during the periprocedural period and these patients served as the control group. Blood samples for CK-MB were obtained before and at 6 h, 24 h, and 36 h after the procedure.

Results:

217 patients were in the CCB group (mean age 60.2 ± 9.3 years, 162 males), and 353 were in the control group (mean age 60.0 ± 10.1 years, 262 males). CK-MB levels increased above the normal values in 41 patients (18.9%) of the CCBs group and in 97 patients (27.5%) of the control group (p = 0.02). Median CK-MB levels were significantly higher in the control group for all studied hours (for all p < 0.05).

Conclusions:

Prior oral CCB therapy may have favorable effects in preventing myocyte necrosis after elective PCI.

The pathogenesis and treatment of no-reflow occurring during percutaneous coronary intervention

No-reflow is one of the major causes of postinterventional rise of cardiac enzyme and myocardial infarction (MI). This complication is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). During and after a no-reflow episode, the patient can suffer from severe chest pain, hypotension, bradycardia, hemodynamic collapse, MI, congestive heart failure, and death. Every effort should be taken to reduce the incidence of this complication. The distal embolic protection device has been shown to decrease this risk in saphenous vein graft (SVG) interventions but not in native coronaries. On the other hand, the use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonists have been effective in reducing the occurrence of no-reflow during PCI of native coronaries but not during SVG interventions. The treatment of no-reflow is based on the intracoronary administrations of medications that induce maximal vasodilatation in small distal coronary vasculature. The most commonly used drugs in this setting are adenosine, nitroprusside, and verapamil. The goal of this study was to review the pathogenesis and treatment of no-reflow in patients undergoing PCI.

Impact of Nicorandil to Prevent Reperfusion Injury in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction Sigmart Multicenter Angioplasty Revascularization Trial (SMART)

BACKGROUND

Nicorandil in conjunction with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has been reported to reduce reperfusion injury events and improve cardiac function in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). This multicenter study was undertaken to determine the effectiveness and optimal administration of nicorandil in AMI patients.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Ninety-two patients with first AMI were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups: intracoronary administration of nicorandil (Group A), combined intravenous and intracoronary administration of nicorandil (Group B), and no nicorandil administration (Group C). The primary endpoint was a composite of the incidence of reperfusion-induced arrhythmia, chest pain, and no-reflow/slow-reflow. The secondary endpoint was the combined rate of improvement in the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction frame count (cTFC) and ST resolution (STR). A significant difference was observed in the primary endpoint for Group B as compared with Group C (p<0.05). In the meantime, a significant improvement was shown in the secondary endpoint for Group B compared with Group C (p=0.04 and 0.006 for cTFC and STR, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Combined intravenous and intracoronary administration of nicorandil reduces reperfusion injury during PCI and improves the cTFC and STR in AMI, and appears to be preferable to intracoronary administration alone.

Coronary no-reflow phenomenon

No-reflow occurs in up to one third of patients with acute myocardial infarction during acute percutaneous intervention, and occasionally during elective interventions, particularly vein graft intervention. Multiple intracoronary medications will restore flow in most cases. We begin with 100 to 1000 mg of nitroprusside, verapamil, or adenosine at a similar dosage. We give it at 100-mg increments at high velocity. We inject it distally in the epicardial artery to avoid any systemic effect, and we do it through an intracoronary perfusion catheter. At times, we use prophylactic injections (prior to balloon inflation), particularly in vein graft intervention. Most of these strategies are not formally approved for treating no-reflow. However, reversing this condition with restoration of normal coronary flow is essential for an improved left ventricular function and a better cardiac outcome.