CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

The Utility of Contrast Medium Fractional Flow Reserve in Functional Assessment Of Coronary Disease in Daily Practice Significantly less inappropriate shocks in ischemic patients compared to non-ischemic patients: The S-ICD experience of a high volume single-center Diagnosis of Nonischemic Stage B Heart Failure in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Optimal Parameters for Prediction of Heart Failure Long-term survival in patients undergoing percutaneous interventions with or without intracoronary pressure wire guidance or intracoronary ultrasonographic imaging: a large cohort study Second-generation drug-eluting stent implantation followed by 6- versus 12-month dual antiplatelet therapy: the SECURITY randomized clinical trial Angiotensin–neprilysin inhibition versus enalapril in heart failure A Fully Magnetically Levitated Left Ventricular Assist Device — Final Report Patient Selection and Clinical Outcomes in the STOPDAPT-2 Trial: An All-Comer Single-Center Registry During the Enrollment Period of the STOPDAPT-2 Randomized Controlled Trial Prognostic implication of lipidomics in patients with coronary total occlusion undergoing PCI Surgery Does Not Improve Survival in Patients With Isolated Severe Tricuspid Regurgitation

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.