CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Low-Risk Patients Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes Comparison of Early Surgical or Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Versus Conservative Management in Low-Flow, Low-Gradient Aortic Stenosis Using Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting: Results From the TOPAS Prospective Observational Cohort Study Single Versus Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Following TAVR: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Clinical Outcome After DK Crush Versus Culotte Stenting of Distal Left Main Bifurcation Lesions: The 3-Year Follow-Up Results of the DKCRUSH-III Study 1-Year Outcomes of Delayed Versus Immediate Intervention in Patients With Transient ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Assessment and Quantitation of Stent Results by Intracoronary Optical Coherence Tomography Surgical ineligibility and mortality among patients with unprotected left main or multivessel coronary artery disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention Expansion or contraction of stenting in coronary artery disease? Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Using Drug-Eluting Stents Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting for Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Stenosis: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

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 nonST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromelike 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.