Retrospective comparative study of primary intracoronary stenting versus balloon angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Balloon angioplasty has been shown to be an effective therapy for the treatment of acute myocardial infarction but is associated with a high restenosis rate, substantial early recoil, persistent thrombus and need for intracoronary thrombolysis, and a high rate of reclosure. Because many of the limitations of balloon angioplasty in the noninfarction setting are addressed by intracoronary stenting, we examined the results of primary stenting of 18 consecutive patients treated for acute myocardial infarction, and compared the results to those achieved with primary balloon angioplasty in 18 prior cases. Despite the presence of thrombus prior to angioplasty in 13 of the stented patients, no intracoronary thrombolytic therapy was required. Mean percent stenosis using quantitative coronary angiography was 17.7 ± 10.2% after primary stenting compared with 43.7 ± 20.3% after primary balloon angioplasty (P < .001). One stent patient who had all anticoagulant and antiplatelet therapy withdrawn early suffered subacute thrombosis. Patients were followed up to 3 yr. Complications were similar in the two groups. We conclude that primary stenting for acute myocardial infarction results in superior angiographic appearance as well as resolution of thrombus without the need for routine thrombolysis, and is associated with a low complication rate and excellent short‐term clinical patency. Cathet. Cardiovasc. Diagn. 40:235–239, 1997.

This publication has 23 references indexed in Scilit: