DANAMI 3: Deferred Stenting and Ischemic Postconditioning Have No Benefit in Primary PCI

Both ischemic postconditioning and deferred stenting showed no benefit in randomized studies conducted as part of the DANAMI 3 program.

Both the DANAMI 3-DEFER and the DANAMI 3-iPOSTshowed slight improvements in ventricular function after intervention, but clinical end points saw no change.

This does not mean that outcomes should be considered negative, only that the available treatments for infarction are near optimal, which is why it is rather difficult to show significant differences with any new intervention.

The DANAMI 3-DEFERwas conducted in 4 centers with onsite primary PCI capacity in Denmark, and included 1215 patients randomized to primary PCI vs. deferred stenting.

In the differed stenting group, a minimal mechanical intervention was used to reestablish flow in the culprit vessel and reassess with new catheterization at 48 hrs. 14% did not receive the stent vs. 1% in the conventional group.

Differed stenting did not reduce the primary end point rate (a composite of death from any cause, hospitalization for heart failure, a second heart attack, and unplanned repeat angioplasty in infarction culprit artery) at 42 month follow up (17% vs 18%; HR 0.99; CI 95% 0.76-1.29). Of the individual components, only unplanned repeat PCI was different between the groups, with a higher rate in those with differed stenting (7% vs 4%; HR 1.70; CI 95% 1.04-2.92).

The DANAM 3-iPOST tested the use of ischemic postconditioning that consisted of four 30-second occlusions with a balloon to try to ease reperfusion injury to the myocardium.

This study included 1234 patients randomized to conventional PCI vs. ischemic post conditioning. Ischemic postconditioning did not show benefits compared to conventional PCI(10.5% vs 11.2%; HR 0.93; CI 95% 0.66-1.30) and this was observed across all subgroups.

More articles by this author

PARTNER 2A: TAVI Not Inferior to Surgery in Intermediate Risk Patients

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVI) with the new generation balloon expandable valve is at least as good as surgery in intermediate risk patients with...

The SAPIEN 3 Valve Resulted Superior to Surgery in an Observational Study

The last generation of the balloon expandable valve resulted superior to surgery in intermediate riskpatients, in a registry analyzis. Patients treated with the SAPIEN...

CoreValve US Pivotal: at 3 Years, the Self-Expanding Valve Maintains Its Advantage vs. Surgery

At 3 year follow up, the CoreValve US Pivotal study on high risk elderly patients, the self-expanding valve showed a lasting benefit vs. surgery. These...

PARTNER 1 in +90 Year Old Patients: TAVI and the Age Paradox

A new analyzis of the PARTNER 1 trial showed that patients over 90 undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVI) show no increase in mortality...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

TCT 2024 | FAVOR III EUROPA

The study FAVOR III EUROPA, a randomized trial, included 2,000 patients with chronic coronary syndrome, or stabilized acute coronary syndrome, and intermediate lesions. 1,008...

TCT 2024 | TRISCEND II

This randomized study included 400 patients; 267 were treated with EVOQUE valve and 133 with optimal medical treatment (OMT). After one-year follow-up, there were no...

TCT 2024 – ACCESS-TAVI: Comparing Percutaneous Access Closure Strategies After TAVI

Vascular access complications following transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) remain common. However, few studies compare vascular access closure methods.  Based on the CHOICE-CLOSURE and MASH...