Search

Introduction: Real-life data comparing clopidogrel, prasugrel, and ticagrelor for unselected patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) are lacking, as are data for the temporal distribution of ischemic and bleeding risks., Methods: A total of 19,825 patients were enrolled from the RENAMI and BleeMACS registries. Both were multicenter, retrospective, observational registries including the data and outcomes of consecutive patients with ACS who underwent primary PCI and were discharged with dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). We evaluated the long-term outcome stratified by the different antiplatelet agents., Results: A total of 14,105 patients (71.2%) were treated with clopidogrel, 2364 patients (11.9%) with prasugrel and 3356 patients (16.9%) with ticagrelor. After propensity score matching, at 1 year, prasugrel reduced the incidence of net adverse clinical events (NACE; a composite endpoint of all-cause death, myocardial infarction [MI] and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium [BARC] 3-5 bleeding) (4.2% vs.7.6%, p = 0.002) and of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE; a composite endpoint of death and MI) compared with clopidogrel (2.6% vs. 5.2%, p = 0.007). Ticagrelor decreased rates of MACE compared with clopidogrel (2.7% vs. 6.2%, p < 0.001), but not of NACE (6.6% vs. 8.7%, p = 0.07). Ticagrelor presented similar performance in terms of MACE compared with prasugrel (2.8% vs. 2.4%, p = 0.56), with a trend towards a reduction in MI (0.2% vs. 0.4%, p = 0.56), but with higher risk of BARC 3-5 bleedings (3.8% vs. 1.7%, p = 0.04). In the daily risk analysis, clopidogrel presented a binomial distribution with a peak of ischemic risk at 3 months, which decreased towards bleedings; prasugrel had a constant equivalence between opposite risks; and ticagrelor constantly reduced recurrent MIs despite higher risk of BARC 3-5 events., Conclusion: In real life, ticagrelor is more effective in reducing ischemic events during the first year after ACS, despite an increased risk of major bleedings, while prasugrel assures a better balance between ischemic and bleeding recurrent events.

Background: Although intracoronary abciximab failed to improve prognosis compared with intravenous route in unselected ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients, little is known about the role of intracoronary abciximab in diabetic patients., Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy of intracoronary abciximab administration in diabetic patients with STEMI undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)., Methods: Reperfusional and clinical outcomes of intracoronary abciximab compared with intravenous bolus abciximab according to diabetic status were evaluated in a pooled analysis of five randomized trials including 3158 STEMI patients. The primary clinical endpoint of the study was the composite of death or reinfarction at 30-day follow-up., Results: Among 584 diabetic patients (18.5%), the composite of death or reinfarction was significantly reduced with intracoronary abciximab compared to intravenous abciximab (4.7% vs. 8.8%; rate ratio [RR], 0.50; 95% confidence intervals [CI], 0.26-0.99; p=0.04), driven by numerically lower deaths (3.7% vs. 6.4%; RR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.26-1.20; p=0.13). Moreover, a significant reduction in definite or probable stent thrombosis was observed in patients receiving intracoronary abciximab (1% vs. 3.5%; RR, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.07-0.99; p=0.04). Although formal tests for interaction were not significant, no clinical benefit was apparent in the cohort of STEMI patients without diabetes (n=2574)., Conclusions: In diabetic patients with STEMI undergoing primary PCI, intracoronary abciximab may improve clinical outcomes as compared with standard intravenous use. These findings require confirmation in a dedicated randomized trial., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Several studies have highlighted the prognostic role of preprocedural Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) flow in the infarct-related artery (IRA) in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). However, the impact of preprocedural IRA occlusion in patients with diabetes with STEMI has been insufficiently studied. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of baseline IRA occlusion and diabetic status in patients with STEMI who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention by using data from a pooled analysis of randomized trials comparing intracoronary with intravenous abciximab bolus administration. A total of 3,046 patients with STEMI who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention were included. Diabetes was present in 578 patients (19%). The primary outcome was mortality after a median follow-up period of 375 days. Secondary end points were reinfarction and stent thrombosis. In patients without diabetes, IRA occlusion versus no occlusion was not associated with increased rates of mortality (4.3% vs 2.7%, p = 0.051) and reinfarction (3.3% vs 2.5%, p = 0.33). Patients with diabetes with IRA occlusion compared with those without occlusion showed higher rates of mortality (10.6% vs 4.6%, p = 0.01) and reinfarction (5.6% vs 2.1%, p = 0.03). Baseline IRA occlusion increased the rate of stent thrombosis in the nondiabetic (2.1% vs 1.0%, p = 0.04) and diabetic (3.2% vs 0.8%, p = 0.05) cohorts. Interaction analysis demonstrated that the risk for death and reinfarction was significantly increased when diabetes and IRA occlusion occurred concomitantly. In conclusion, patients with STEMI with diabetes and baseline IRA occlusion had disproportionately higher rates of death and reinfarction. Preprocedural IRA occlusion increased the risk for stent thrombosis, irrespective of diabetic status., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The MARIA randomized trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of melatonin for the reduction of reperfusion injury in patients undergoing revascularization for ST-elevation myocardial infarction ( STEMI). This was a prespecified interim analysis. A total of 146 patients presenting with STEMI within 6 hours of chest pain onset were randomized to receive intravenous and intracoronary melatonin (n=73) or placebo (n=73) during primary percutaneous coronary intervention ( PPCI). Primary endpoint was myocardial infarct size as assessed by magnetic resonance imaging ( MRI) at 6 ± 2 days. Secondary endpoints were changes in left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction ( LVEF) at 130 ± 10 days post- PPCI and adverse events during the first year. No significant differences in baseline characteristics were observed between groups. MRI was performed in 108 patients (86.4%). Myocardial infarct size by MRI evaluated 6 ± 2 days post- PPCI, did not differ between melatonin and placebo groups ( P=.63). Infarct size assessed by MRI at 130 ± 10 days post- PPCI, performed in 91 patients (72.8%), did not show statistically significant differences between groups ( P=.27). The recovery of LVEF from 6 ± 2 to 130 ± 10 days post- PPCI was greater in the placebo group (60.0 ± 10.4% vs 53.1 ± 12.5%, P=.008). Both left ventricular end-diastolic and end-systolic volumes were lower in the placebo group ( P=.01). The incidence of adverse events at 1 year was comparable in both groups ( P=.150). Thus, in a nonrestricted STEMI population, intravenous and intracoronary melatonin was not associated with a reduction in infarct size and has an unfavourable effect on the ventricular volumes and LVEF evolution. Likewise, there is lack of toxicity of melatonin with the doses used. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Diabetic patients are at increased risk for future cardiovascular events after ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Administration of an intracoronary abciximab bolus during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) may be beneficial in this high-risk subgroup.Objectives: This study sought to report the 1-year clinical outcomes and cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) findings in STEMI patients with and without diabetes randomized to intracoronary or intravenous abciximab bolus at the time of primary PCI.Methods: Patient-level data from 3 randomized trials were pooled. The primary endpoint was the composite of death or reinfarction. Comprehensive CMR imaging was performed in 1 study.Results: Of 2,470 patients, 473 (19%) had diabetes and 1,997 (81%) did not. At 1 year, the primary endpoint was significantly reduced in diabetic patients randomized to intracoronary abciximab compared with those randomized to intravenous bolus (9.2% vs. 17.6%; hazard ratio [HR]: 0.49; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.28 to 0.83; p = 0.009). The intracoronary abciximab bolus did not reduce the primary endpoint in patients without diabetes (7.4% vs. 7.5%; HR: 0.95; 95% CI: 0.68 to 1.33; p = 0.77), resulting in a significant interaction (p = 0.034). Among diabetic patients, intracoronary versus intravenous abciximab bolus was associated with a significantly reduced risk of death (5.8% vs. 11.2%; HR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.26 to 0.98; p = 0.043) and definite/probable stent thrombosis (1.3% vs. 4.8%; HR: 0.27; 95% CI: 0.08 to 0.98; p = 0.046). At CMR (n = 792), the myocardial salvage index was significantly increased only in diabetic patients randomized to intracoronary compared with intravenous abciximab (54.4; interquartile range: 35.1 to 78.2 vs. 39.0, interquartile range: 24.7 to 61.7; p = 0.011; p for interaction vs. no diabetes = 0.016).Conclusions: In diabetic patients with STEMI, the administration of intracoronary abciximab improved the effectiveness of primary PCI compared with the intravenous bolus. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]