Primary PCI versus pharmacoinvasive strategy for ST elevation myocardial infarction

Background: The rationale for pharmacoinvasive strategy is that many patients have a persistent reduction in flow in the infarct-related artery. The aim of the present study is to assess safety and efficacy of pharmacoinvasive strategy using streptokinase compared to primary PCI and ischemia driven PCI on degree of myocardial salvage and outcomes. Methods and results: Sixty patients with 1st attack of acute STEMI within 12 h were randomized to 4 groups: primary PCI for patients presented to PPCI-capable centers (group I), transfer to PCI if presented to non-PCI capable center (group II), pharmacoinvasive strategy “Streptokinase followed by PCI within 3–24 h” (group III) and fibrinolytic followed by ischemia driven PCI (group IV). The primary endpoint is the infarction size and microvascular obstruction (MVO) measured by cardiac MRI (CMR) 3–5 days post-MI. Pharmacoinvasive strategy led to a significant reduction in infarction size, MVO and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event (MACCE) compared to group IV but minor bleeding was significantly higher compared to other groups. Conclusions: Pharmacoinvasive strategy resulted in effective reperfusion and smaller infarction size in patients with early STEMI who could not undergo primary PCI within 2 h after the first medical contact. This can provide a wide time window for PCI when the application of primary PCI within the optimal time limit is not possible. However, it was associated with a slightly increased risk of minor bleeding. Keywords: Pharmacoinvasive strategy, Primary PCI, Infarction size, Microvascular obstruction (MVO), Cardiac MRI (CMR)

Abstract licence: CC BY-NC

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.