CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

2-Year Outcomes After Stenting of Lipid-Rich and Nonrich Coronary Plaques A randomized multicentre trial to compare revascularization with optimal medical therapy for the treatment of chronic total coronary occlusions Overall and Cause-Specific Mortality in Randomized Clinical Trials Comparing Percutaneous Interventions With Coronary Bypass Surgery: A Meta-analysis When high‐volume PCI operators in high‐volume hospitals move to lower volume hospitals—Do they still maintain high volume and quality of outcomes? Cardiac monocytes and macrophages after myocardial infarction Efficacy and safety of rosuvastatin vs. atorvastatin in lowering LDL cholesterol : A meta-analysis of trials with East Asian populations Successful catheter ablation of electrical storm after myocardial infarction Cardiac Shock Care Centers: JACC Review Topic of the Week Qualitative Methodology in Cardiovascular Outcomes Research: A Contemporary Look Coronary Artery Calcium Is Associated with Left Ventricular Diastolic Function Independent of Myocardial Ischemia

Original ResearchVolume 75, Issue 12, March 2020

JOURNAL:J Am Coll Cardiol. Article Link

Intravenous Statin Administration During Myocardial Infarction Compared With Oral Post-Infarct Administration

G Mendieta, S Ben-Aicha, M Gutiérrez et al. Keywords: cardioprotection; MI; pigs; statin; timing

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND - Beyond lipid-lowering, statins exert cardioprotective effects. High-dose statin treatment seems to reduce cardiovascular complications in high-risk patients. The ideal timing and administration regime remain unknown.

 

OBJECTIVES - This study compared the cardioprotective effects of intravenous statin administration during myocardial infarction (MI) with oral administration immediately post-MI.

 

METHODS - Hypercholesterolemic pigs underwent MI induction (90 min of ischemia) and were kept for 42 days. Animals were distributed in 3 arms (A): A1 received an intravenous bolus of atorvastatin during MI; A2 received an intravenous bolus of vehicle during MI; and A3 received oral atorvastatin within 2 h post-MI. A1 and A3 remained on daily oral atorvastatin for the following 42 days. Cardiac magnetic resonance analysis (days 3 and 42 post-MI) and molecular/histological studies were performed.

 

RESULTS - At day 3, A1 showed a 10% reduction in infarct size compared with A3 and A2 and a 50% increase in myocardial salvage. At day 42, both A1 and A3 showed a significant decrease in scar size versus A2; however, A1 showed a further 24% reduction versus A3. Functional analyses revealed improved systolic performance in A1 compared with A2 and less wall motion abnormalities in the jeopardized myocardium versus both groups at day 42. A1 showed enhanced collagen content and AMP-activated protein kinase activation in the scar, increased vessel density in the penumbra, higher tumor necrosis factor α plasma levels and lower peripheral blood mononuclear cell activation versus both groups.

 

CONCLUSIONS - Intravenous administration of atorvastatin during MI limits cardiac damage, improves cardiac function, and mitigates remodeling to a larger extent than when administered orally shortly after reperfusion. This therapeutic approach deserves to be investigated in ST-segment elevation MI patients.