Intracoronary fixed dose of nitroprusside via thrombus aspiration catheter for the prevention of the no‑reflow phenomenon following primary percutaneous coronary intervention in acute myocardial infarction
- Authors:
- Published online on: June 4, 2013 https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2013.1139
- Pages: 479-484
Metrics: Total
Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Abstract
Previous studies have shown that intracoronary (IC) nitroprusside (NTP) injection is a safe and effective strategy for the treatment of no‑reflow (NR) during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The present study tested the hypothesis that, on the basis of thrombus aspiration for the treatment of ST‑segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), the selective IC administration of a fixed dose of NTP (100 µg) plus tirofiban is a safe and superior treatment method compared with the IC administration of tirofiban alone for the prevention of NR during primary PCI. A total of 162 consecutive patients with STEMI, who underwent primary PCI within 12 h of onset, were randomly assigned to two groups: Group A, IC administration of a fixed dose of NTP (100 µg) plus tirofiban (10 µg/kg) and group B, IC administration of tirofiban (10 µg/kg) alone (n=80 and n=82, respectively). The drugs were selectively injected into the infarct‑related artery (IRA) via a thrombus aspiration catheter advanced into the IRA. The primary end‑point was post‑procedural corrected thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) frame count (CTFC). The proportion of complete (>70%) ST‑segment resolution (STR); the TIMI myocardial perfusion grade (TMPG) 2‑3 ratio following PCI; the peak value of creatine kinase (CK)‑MB; the TIMI flow grade; the incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) and the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) after 6 months of follow‑up were observed as the secondary end‑points. There were no significant differences in the baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics between the two groups. Compared with group B, group A had i) a lower CTFC (23±7 versus 29±11, P=0.000); ii) a higher proportion of complete STR (72.5 versus 55.9%, P=0.040); iii) an enhanced TMPG 2‑3 ratio (71.3 versus 53.7%, P=0.030) and iv) a lower peak CK‑MB value (170±56 versus 210±48 U/l, P=0.010). There were no statistically significant differences in the final TIMI grade‑3 flow between the two groups (92.5 versus 91.5% for groups A and B, respectively; P=0.956). The LVEF at 6 months was higher in group A than group B (63±9 versus 53±11%, respectively; P=0.001); however, the incidence of MACEs was not statistically different between the two groups, although there was a trend indicating improvement in group A (log rank χ2=0.953, P=0.489). The selective IC administration of a fixed dose of NTP (100 µg) plus tirofiban via a thrombus aspiration catheter advanced into the IRA is a safe and superior treatment method compared with tirofiban alone in patients with STEMI undergoing primary PCI. This novel therapeutic strategy improves the myocardial level perfusion, in addition to reducing the infarct size. Furthermore, it may improve the postoperative clinical prognosis following PCI.
