Periprocedural Infarction vs. Spontaneous Infarction: Prognostic Significance 

Original title: Comparison of the Prognosis of Spontaneous and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention–Related Myocardial Infarction. Reference: Sergio Leonardi, MD et al. Journal of the American College of Cardiology Vol. 60, No. 22, 2012

Clinical significance of myocardial infarction (MI) associated to coronary angioplasty is a controversial issue worldwide. Most of research on coronary disease includes it as a primary end point weighed against spontaneous MI.

The aim of this study was to compare periprocedural MI vs. spontaneous MI. It analyzed data from 9,087 patients enrolled in two trials that assessed Non ST Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome (EARLY-ACS and SYNERGY): among these, 893 periprocedural MI and 298 spontaneous MI occurred, and ratios for death at 12 months were compared.

Authors defined periprocedural MI as CK-MB more than 3 times the ULN (upper limit of normal). Adjusted hazard ratios for 1-year death were 1.39 (95% CI: 1.01 to 1.89) for periprocedural MI vs. 5.37 (95% CI: 3.9 to 7.38) for spontaneous MI. In determining the CK-Mb threshold for periprocedural MI to achieve the same prognosis as spontaneous MI, it was observed that elevations of 27 times the ULN were necessary for this to happen.

Conclusion 

The definition of periprocedural infarction used in clinical trials is poorly associated to events, compared to spontaneous infarction.

Editorial Comment:

This study confirms an assumption based on intuition, that cardiac enzymes elevation after angioplasty does not have the same prognosis than Type 1 MI. Further evaluation is required to confirm these results using the new definition of periprocedural MI (a 5 times increase of troponin levels with clinical or electrical signs or ischemia image). Despite the above observations, this study is good news for interventional cardiologists.

Courtesy of María Sol Andres, MD
Hospital Universitario
Fundación Favaloro – Argentina

Dra. María Sol Andrés para SOLACI.ORG

More articles by this author

iFR- vs. FFR-Guided Coronary Revascularization: 5-Year Clinical Outcomes

The assessment of coronary stenosis using coronary physiology has become a key tool in guiding revascularization. The two most widely used techniques are fractional...

FLAVOUR Trial Substudy: FFR or IVUS in the Assessment of Diabetic Patients

Patients with diabetes often present with more complex coronary artery disease compared to non-diabetic patients, with a higher prevalence of diffuse or multivessel disease....

ROLLER COASTR-EPIC22: Comparison of Plaque Modification Techniques in Severely Calcified Coronary Lesions

The presence of coronary calcium significantly limits the success of percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI), primarily due to suboptimal stent expansion. This can lead to...

Provisional Stenting vs. Two-Stent Technique in Non-Complex Left Main Disease: Three-Year Follow-Up of the EBC-Main Study

In left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease, for lesions of low to intermediate complexity according to the SYNTAX score, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

RACE Trial: Effect of Balloon Pulmonary Angioplasty and Riociguat on Right Ventricular Afterload and Function in Chronic Thromboembolic Pulmonary Hypertension

Even though pulmonary endarterectomy is the treatment of choice for chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH), up to 40% of patients are not candidates because...

iFR- vs. FFR-Guided Coronary Revascularization: 5-Year Clinical Outcomes

The assessment of coronary stenosis using coronary physiology has become a key tool in guiding revascularization. The two most widely used techniques are fractional...

TAVR in Small Annuli: What Valve Should We Use?

One of the major challenges of severe aortic stenosis are patients with small aortic annuli, defined as ≤430 mm² aortic valve area. This condition...