Primary stenting versus primary balloon angioplasty for treating acute myocardial infarction

Nordmann, Alain; Bucher, Heiner C.; Hengstler, Peter; Harr, Thomas; Young, Jim

doi:10.1002/14651858.cd005313

Cited by 45 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 83 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Indications for DES in a few specific patient or lesion subsets remain a matter of debate. In selected STEMI patients [234,235], SES and PES were shown to be safe and effective (TYPHOON, HORIZONS-AMI, PASEO, and ZEST-AMI) with follow-up extending from 2 to 4 years. There is no solid evidence that one DES provides superior clinical outcome in patients with diabetes, due to the limited number of smallsized trials or the limitations of subgroup analyses [115].…”

Section: Drug-eluting Stentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Guidelines on myocardial revascularization

Kolh

Wijns

Danchin³

et al. 2010

European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery

400

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Guidelines and Expert Consensus Documents summarize and\ud evaluate all available evidence with the aim of assisting\ud physicians in selecting the best management strategy for an\ud individual patient suffering from a given condition, taking\ud into account the impact on outcome and the risk benefit\ud ratio of diagnostic or therapeutic means. Guidelines are no\ud substitutes for textbooks and their legal implications have\ud been discussed previously. Guidelines and recommendations should help physicians to make decisions in their daily\ud practice. However, the ultimate judgement regarding the\ud care of an individual patient must be made by his/her\ud responsible physician(s).\ud The recommendations for formulating and issuing ESC\ud Guidelines and Expert Consensus Documents can be found\ud on the ESC website (http://www.escardio.org/knowledge/\ud guidelines/rules).\ud Members of this Task Force were selected by the European\ud Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for\ud Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) to represent all physicians\ud involved with the medical and surgical care of patients\ud with coronary artery disease (CAD). A critical evaluation\ud of diagnostic and therapeutic procedures is performed\ud including assessment of the risk benefit ratio. Estimates\ud of expected health outcomes for society are included,\ud where data exist. The level of evidence and the strength\ud of recommendation of particular treatment options are\ud weighed and graded according to predefined scales, as\ud outlined in Tables 1 and 2.\ud The members of the Task Force have provided disclosure\ud statements of all relationships that might be perceived as\ud real or potential sources of conflicts of interest. These\ud disclosure forms are kept on file at European Heart House,\ud headquarters of the ESC. Any changes in conflict of interest\ud that arose during the writing period were notified to the ESC.\ud The Task Force report received its entire financial support\ud from the ESC and EACTS, without any involvement of the\ud pharmaceutical, device, or surgical industry.\ud ESC and EACTS Committees for Practice Guidelines are\ud responsible for the endorsement process of these joint\ud Guidelines. The finalized document has been approved by all\ud the experts involved in the Task Force, and was submitted to\ud outside specialists selected by both societies for review. The\ud document is revised, and finally approved by ESC and EACTS and subsequently published simultaneously in the European\ud Heart Journal and the European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic\ud Surgery.\ud After publication, dissemination of the Guidelines is of\ud paramount importance. Pocket-sized versions and personal\ud digital assistant-downloadable versions are useful at the\ud point of care.\ud Some surveys have shown that the intended users are\ud sometimes unaware of the existence of guidelines, or simply\ud do not translate them into practice. Thus, implementation\ud programmes are needed because it has been shown that\ud the outcome of dis...

show abstract

Section: Drug-eluting Stentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Guidelines on myocardial revascularization

Kolh

Wijns

Danchin³

et al. 2010

European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery

400

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Primary PCI with balloon angioplasty alone has repeatedly been shown to improve outcomes compared with fibrinolytic therapy, and a meta-analysis reported a 2.1% absolute mortality reduction [41]. Primary PCI with stent implantation further reduces reinfarction and target vessel revascularization [42]. More germane to the current review, Aversano et al [43] randomized 451 STEMI patients presenting to hospitals without backup surgery to fibrinolytic therapy or primary PCI.…”

Section: Primary Pci For Stemi In the Stent Eramentioning

confidence: 89%

Percutaneous Coronary Interventions in Facilities Without Cardiac Surgery on Site

Pride

Gibson

2011

Curr Cardiol Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prior to the widespread adoption of intracoronary stent implantation, potential complications of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) necessitated the presence of backup cardiac surgery. However, as stent implantation has become the predominant form of PCI, the incidence of emergent cardiac surgery has declined exponentially. Despite this, current guidelines recommend against the performance of elective PCI at hospitals without on-site cardiac surgery and recommend that primary PCI for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) might be considered at hospitals without backup cardiac surgery. These recommendations are based predominantly on two principles: (1) hospital volume for PCI is strongly associated with clinical outcomes, and (2) results from a large registry study, in which the authors reported a substantial increase in mortality among patients undergoing non-primary/rescue PCI at hospitals without backup cardiac surgery. Since that time, evidence from multiple studies has suggested that performance of PCI at hospitals without backup cardiac surgery is feasible, safe, and both clinically and cost effective. Among STEMI patients, in particular, performance of primary PCI at hospitals without on-site cardiac surgery reduces time to reperfusion and subsequent adverse cardiovascular events as well as likely reducing infarct size. In this review, we will examine the evidence surrounding the performance of PCI for stable and unstable coronary disease at hospitals without on-site backup cardiac surgery.

show abstract

“…The 1990s brought the development of novel percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs), particularly the introduction of coronary stents, initially bare metal and later drug-eluting stents following intracoronary balloon inflation to overcome restenosis. As summarised in pooled data of nine trials for primary stenting, the results were better for reduction of reinfarction and repeat target vessel revascularisation [22]. Primary angioplasty may be the preferred approach in patients with extensive MI who have immediate access to a cardiac catheterisation laboratory with experienced personnel.…”

Section: Reperfusionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Looking Beyond Reperfusion

2016

JCCR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Acute Myocardial Infarction is thrombotic occlusion of coronary artery and sudden stoppage of blood supply leading to death of heart muscles. The Reperfusion phase of the treatment although promising could salvage at best only 2-4% of the myocardium at 6 months and also carries the risk of reperfusion injury. Despite the best optimal reperfusion therapy, the mortality of AMI still remains 9% at one year and cardiac failure occurs in 11.0%. This appeals us to look beyond reperfusion therapy, repairing or regenerating lost myocardium via cell based therapy, tissue engineering and gene therapy. Efforts are directed towards regenerating myocardium which may revolutionize the treatment of AMI. This not only will decrease the mortality but also improve long term survival and quality of life.

show abstract

Primary stenting versus primary balloon angioplasty for treating acute myocardial infarction

Abstract: This is a reprint of a Cochrane review, prepared and maintained by The Cochrane Collaboration and published in The Cochrane Library 2005, Issue 4 http://www.thecochranelibrary.com 1 Primary stenting versus primary balloon angioplasty for treating acute myocardial infarction (Review)

Cited by 45 publications

References 83 publications

Guidelines on myocardial revascularization

Guidelines on myocardial revascularization

Percutaneous Coronary Interventions in Facilities Without Cardiac Surgery on Site

Looking Beyond Reperfusion

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About