This Article Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 1753944709335755v1 3/3/181    most recent References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Tacoy, G. Articles by Timurkaynak, T. PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Tacoy, G. Articles by Timurkaynak, T. Pubmed/NCBI databases Medline Plus Health Information Angioplasty Heart Attack Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

The comparison of early and late outcome of direct and conventional stenting of patients with st elevation myocardial infarction

Gazi University, Faculty of Medicine, Cardiology Department, Ankara, Turkey gtacoy{at}gmail.com

Guliz Erdem Yazici

Kirikkale Yuksek Ihtisas Hospital, Cardiology Department, Kirikkale, Turkey

Murat Erden

Gazi University, Faculty of Medicine, Cardiology Department, Ankara, Turkey

Timur Timurkaynak

Gazi University, Faculty of Medicine, Cardiology Department, Ankara, Turkey

Background: The aim of this study was to compare direct and conventional stenting procedure in the subacute stable phase on short- and long-term results in patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction.

Methods: Eighty-eight clinically stable ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients were enrolled into the study. The patients were classified as group I (direct stenting) and group II (conventional stenting — stenting after balloon dilatation). Baseline characteristics of patients were scanned from hospital records. Coronary angiograms before and after the revascularization procedure were evaluated with the quantitative coronary angiogram technique. Patients were followed for 5 years for clinical outcomes. The study population consisted of 58 patients (65%) in group I and 30 patients (35%) in group II. Mean ages were 55.8 ± 10.8 and 57.3 ± 9.8, respectively.

Results: There were no significant differences between the two groups regarding clinical characteristics (hypertension, diabetes mellitus, family history of cardiovascular disease, smoking and dyslipidemia). The thrombus score was similar in both groups. Diameter stenosis was lower in group I (54.8 ± 12.7 versus 61.4 ± 12.6; p = 0.023) and TFC (Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction frame count) was higher in group II (30.7 ± 14.5 versus 40.8 ± 26.7; p = 0.02) before the percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Other quantitative angiographic parameters were not different. For all angiographic criteria, the difference between pre- and post-PCI parameters was significantly different in both groups. However, the change in TFC was higher within the group II compared to pre-PCI TFC rates. This difference was statistically significant (p = 0.002). Procedural success was statistically different between groups (69% in group I, 43% in group II; p50.01). Immediate clinical and angiographic results were similar. At 5-year follow-up the incidence of major adverse cardiac events including death, angina pectoris and myocardial infarction were similar for direct stenting versus conventional angioplasty.

Conclusions: Direct stenting is safe and feasible for the treatment in patients with STEMI at the subacute phase. Immediate clinic, angiographic and late clinical results are similar for direct stenting and conventional stenting following balloon angioplasty. Although conventional stenting improved TFC better than direct stenting, this did not translate to better clinical outcomes.

Key Words: myocardial infarction • direct stenting • conventional stenting

This version was published on June 1, 2009

Therapeutic Advances in Cardiovascular Disease, Vol. 3, No. 3, 181-186 (2009)
DOI: 10.1177/1753944709335755


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?