CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

双重抗血小板治疗持续时间

Abstract

Recommended Article

Rivaroxaban Plus Aspirin Versus Aspirin in Relation to Vascular Risk in the COMPASS Trial P2Y12 Inhibitor Monotherapy with Clopidogrel Versus Ticagrelor in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Long-term dual antiplatelet-induced intestinal injury resulting in translocation of intestinal bacteria into blood circulation increased the incidence of adverse events after PCI in patients with coronary artery disease Evolution of antithrombotic therapy in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a 40-year journey Updated Expert Consensus Statement on Platelet Function and Genetic Testing for Guiding P2Y12 Receptor Inhibitor Treatment in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Dual Antiplatelet TherapyIs It Time to Cut the Cord With Aspirin? Safety and efficacy of the bioabsorbable polymer everolimus-eluting stent versus durable polymer drug-eluting stents in high-risk patients undergoing PCI: TWILIGHT-SYNERGY Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Duration in Medically Managed Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients: Sub-Analysis of the OPT-CAD Study

Clinical TrialSeptember 2019

JOURNAL:JACC Cardiovasc Interv. Article Link

1-Year Outcomes of Delayed Versus Immediate Intervention in Patients With Transient ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction

GN Janssens, NW van der Hoeven, JS Lemkes et al. Keywords: ACS with STEMI; transient STEMI ; 1-year MACE; delayed or immediate coronary intervention

ABSTRACT


OBJECTIVES- The aim of the present study was to determine the effect of a delayed versus an immediate invasive approach on final infarct size and clinical outcome up to 1 year.

 

BACKGROUND- Up to 24% of patients with acute coronary syndromes present with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) but show complete resolution of ST-segment elevation and symptoms before revascularization. Current guidelines do not clearly state whether these patients with transient STEMI should be treated with a STEMI-like or non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome–like intervention strategy.

 

METHODS- In this multicenter trial, 142 patients with transient STEMI were randomized 1:1 to either delayed or immediate coronary intervention. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging was performed at 4 days and at 4-month follow-up to assess infarct size and myocardial function. Clinical follow-up was performed at 4 and 12 months.

 

RESULTS- In the delayed (22.7 h) and the immediate (0.4 h) invasive groups, final infarct size as a percentage of the left ventricle was very small (0.4% [interquartile range: 0.0% to 2.5%] vs. 0.4% [interquartile range: 0.0% to 3.5%]; p = 0.79), and left ventricular function was good (mean ejection fraction 59.3 ± 6.5% vs. 59.9 ± 5.4%; p = 0.63). In addition, the overall occurrence of major adverse cardiac events, consisting of death, recurrent infarction, and target lesion revascularization, up to 1 year was low and not different between both groups (5.7% vs. 4.4%, respectively; p = 1.00).

 

CONCLUSIONS- At follow-up, patients with transient STEMI have limited infarction and well-preserved myocardial function in general, and delayed or immediate revascularization has no effect on functional outcome and clinical events up to 1 year.