1-Year Outcomes of Delayed Versus Immediate Intervention in Patients With Transient ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction

A comprehensive guide on the optimal timing of PCI in the setting of acute coronary syndrome: An updated meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Invasive revascularization is recommended for cohorts of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS). However, the optimal timing of invasive revascularization is still controversial and no defined consensus is established. We aim to give a comprehensive appraisal on the optimal timing of invasive strategy in the heterogenous population of ACS.

METHODS

Relevant studies were assessed through PubMed, Scopus, Web of science, and Cochrane Library from inception until April 2023. Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and all-cause mortality were our primary outcomes of interest, other secondary outcomes were cardiac death, TVR, MI, repeat revascularization, recurrent ischemia, and major bleeding. The data was pooled as odds ratio (OR) with its 95% confidence interval (CI) in a random effect model using STATA 17 MP.

RESULTS

A total of 26 studies comprising 21,443 patients were included in the analysis. Early intervention was favor to decrease all-cause mortality (OR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.64 to 0.98, p = 0.03), when compared to delayed intervention. Subgroup analysis showed that early intervention was significantly associated with all-cause mortality reduction in only NSTE-ACS (OR = 0.83, 95% CI [0.7 to 0.99], p = 0.04). However, there was no significant difference between early and delayed intervention in terms of MACE, cardiac death, TVR, MI, repeat revascularization, recurrent ischemia, and major bleeding.

CONCLUSION

An early intervention was associated with lower mortality rates compared to delayed intervention in NSTE-ACS with no significant difference in other clinical outcomes. PROSPERO registration: CRD42023415574.

Factors Responsible for Worse Outcomes in STEMI Patients With Early vs Delayed Treatment Presenting in a Tertiary Care Center in a Third World Country

The aim of the study is to compare the outcomes among ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) cases with early treatment vs delayed treatment. It was a prospective comparative study on 186 patients with consecutive (nonprobability) sampling. Two groups of cases were made as per their time to get admitted to the hospital (ie, within 2 hours of symptom onset = Group A; after 2 hours of symptom onset = Group B). Patients were asked for factors causing a delay in treatment after the onset of symptoms and were monitored for STEMI outcomes. The mean age of all patients was 46.62 ± 9.76 years and there were 140 (75.27%) male and 46 (24.73%) female, and male to female ratio 3:1.Factors significant for delayed treatment vs nondelayed treatment were poor social economic status (65.6% vs 20.4%), history of chronic stable angina (33.3% vs 11.8%), delayed response in the emergency room (20.4% vs 8.6%), delayed ECG acquisition (26.9% vs 8.6%), delayed ECG interpretation (25.8% vs 4.3%), pain at night 12:00-6:00 AM (21.5% vs 9.7%) and belief that the chest pain is noncardiac (26.9% vs 3.2%). Acute heart failure was significantly greater in group B (9.7%) in comparison with group A (2.2%), re-infarction was 18.3% in group B in comparison with 7.5% group A. Similarly sustained ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation and in-hospital mortality were higher in group B (12.9%, 14%, and 12.9% respectively). Due to delayed treatment patients had higher hospital stays, and complications, like acute heart failure, re-infarction, ventricular fibrillation, and in-hospital mortality.

Initial Evaluation and Management of Patients Presenting with Acute Chest Pain in the Emergency Department

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW

To review the initial evaluation of chest pain in the emergency department (ED), with a focus on coronary artery disease (CAD) and acute coronary syndromes (ACS), using consensus statements from major cardiovascular disease organizations.

RECENT FINDINGS

Major cardiovascular organizations have released consensus statements on this topic, notably the 2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain and the 2022 ACC Expert Consensus Decision Pathway on the Evaluation and Disposition of Acute Chest Pain in the Emergency Department. Also, recent studies have evaluated the use of high sensitivity troponin (hs-cTn) to safely rule out myocardial infarction (MI), with the development of rule-out pathways designed to be utilized in the ED. This review highlights the comprehensive differential diagnoses of chest pain in the ED and urgent management of these etiologies, with a focus on cardiovascular etiologies. There exist a few rule-out pathways recommended by major cardiovascular organizations, notably the high-STEACS and the ESC 0/1 and 0/2 pathways that can safely and quickly discharge patients with low risk of MI.

Spontaneous Reperfusion in Patients with Transient ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction-Prevalence, Importance and Approaches to Management

Patients with transient ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) or spontaneous resolution (SpR) of the ST-segment elevation on electrocardiogram could potentially represent a unique group of patients posing a therapeutic management dilemma. In this review, we discuss the potential mechanisms underlying SpR, its relation to clinical outcomes and the proposed management options for patients with transient STEMI with a focus on immediate versus early percutaneous coronary intervention. We performed a structured literature search of PubMed and Cochrane Library databases from inception to December 2020. Studies focused on SpR in patients with acute coronary syndrome were selected. Available data suggest that deferral of angiography and revascularization within 24-48 h in these patients is reasonable and associated with similar or perhaps better outcomes than immediate angiography. Further randomized trials are needed to elucidate the best pharmacological and invasive strategies for this cohort.

Prognostic Value of Pentraxin-3 Change After Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients with ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction

Purpose

So far, ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is still the main cause of morbidity and mortality of cardiovascular diseases worldwide. Recent studies showed that pentraxin-3 (PTX3) was related to the early diagnosis and prognosis of coronary heart disease. This study aimed to investigate the dynamical change of PTX3 after primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) in STEMI patients and its prognostic value.

Patients and methods

In this prospective cohort study, a total of 350 patients were enrolled. The plasma level of PTX3 was measured at admission, 24-hour and 5-day after pPCI. The primary endpoint was the incidence of major adverse cardiac cerebral events (MACCEs) during 1-year follow-up.

Results

Compared with the admission, PTX3 levels were significantly increased at 24 hours, and decreased at 5 days after pPCI in the whole cohort. PTX3 levels at these three time points were not significantly different between the patients with and without MACCEs. Notably, the change in PTX3 from admission to post-pPCI 24-hour (ΔPTX3) was higher in patients with MACCEs (112.83 vs 17.94 ng/dl, P = 0.001). The ROC curves showed that the cut-off value was 29.22 ng/dl and the area under curves was 0.622 (95% CI: 0.554-0.690, p = 0.001). Multivariable cox regression models revealed that the high ΔPTX3 group was an independent predictor of MACCEs (adjusted HR = 2.010, 95% CI = 1.280-3.186, p = 0.003). The higher ΔPTX3 group had significantly higher incidences of revascularization (HR = 2.094, 95% CI: 1.056-4.150, p = 0.034) and composite MACCEs (HR = 2.219, 95% CI: 1.425-3.454, p < 0.001). However, the change of PTX3 level from admission to post-pPCI 5-day had no independently predictive value.

Conclusion

The higher increase of PTX3 level 24-hour after pPCI appeared to have a potential value in independently predicting the incidence of 1-year MACCEs in STEMI patients, especially for coronary revascularization.

Left ventricular function, strain, and infarct characteristics in patients with transient ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction compared to ST-segment and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarctions

AIMS

This study aims to explore cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR)-derived left ventricular (LV) function, strain, and infarct size characteristics in patients with transient ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (TSTEMI) compared to patients with ST-segment and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarctions (STEMI and NSTEMI, respectively).

METHODS AND RESULTS

In total, 407 patients were enrolled in this multicentre observational prospective cohort study. All patients underwent CMR examination 2-8 days after the index event. CMR cine imaging was performed for functional assessment and late gadolinium enhancement to determine infarct size and identify microvascular obstruction (MVO). TSTEMI patients demonstrated the highest LV ejection fraction and the most preserved global LV strain (longitudinal, circumferential, and radial) across the three groups (overall P ≤ 0.001). The CMR-defined infarction was less frequently observed in TSTEMI than in STEMI patients [77 (65%) vs. 124 (98%), P < 0.001] but was comparable with NSTEMI patients [77 (65%) vs. 66 (70%), P = 0.44]. A remarkably smaller infarct size was seen in TSTEMI compared to STEMI patients [1.4 g (0.0-3.9) vs. 13.5 g (5.3-26.8), P < 0.001], whereas infarct size was not significantly different from that in NSTEMI patients [1.4 g (0.0-3.9) vs. 2.1 g (0.0-8.6), P = 0.06]. Whilst the presence of MVO was less frequent in TSTEMI compared to STEMI patients [5 (4%) vs. 53 (31%), P < 0.001], no significant difference was seen compared to NSTEMI patients [5 (4%) vs. 5 (5%), P = 0.72].

CONCLUSION

TSTEMI yielded favourable cardiac LV function, strain, and infarct-related scar mass compared to STEMI and NSTEMI. LV function and infarct characteristics of TSTEMI tend to be more similar to NSTEMI than STEMI.

The Effect of the Timing of Invasive Management on Cardiac Function in Patients with NSTE-ACS, Insights from the OPTIMA-2 Randomized Controlled Trial

The timing of coronary angiography in patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) remains a matter of debate. The relationship between the timing of invasive management and left ventricular function (LVF) is largely unknown. The An Immediate or Early Invasive Strategy in Non-ST-Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome trial (OPTIMA-2) was a randomized controlled prospective open-label multicenter trial that randomized 249 NSTE-ACS patients to either an immediate (<3 h) invasive treatment strategy or an early strategy (12-24 h). Patients were pre-treated with a combination of aspirin, ticagrelor and fondaparinux. The aim of this prespecified sub-analysis was to assess (the recovery of) left ventricular function by analysing echocardiography data obtained <72 h after admission and at 30-day follow-up, for patients with a confirmed diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome. LVF was determined using ejection fraction (EF) and global longitudinal strain (GLS). Inter-observer variability was tested. No difference in the recovery of EF was found between an immediate and early strategy if the follow-up echocardiograms were compared to baseline: 2.5% (standard deviation (SD): 7.9) and 3.3% (SD: 8.5), p = 0.51, nor was there any difference in GLS recovery between the study groups: -0.8% (SD: 2.5) vs. -0.7% (SD 2.8) p = 0.82. If baseline and follow-up echocardiograms were compared, there was a similar but significant improvement in both EF and GLS in both separate study groups. An immediate invasive strategy in NSTE-ACS patients did not result in an improved left ventricular EF or GLS recovery compared with an early strategy.

Trends in ST-elevation myocardial infarction

AIMS

Despite recent progress in coronary artery disease treatment, ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) remains a very high-risk medical condition. Whether recent patients' outcomes, following implementation of the 2012 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) STEMI guidelines have improved, is yet unclear.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The study was based on a prospective detailed registry of 2004 consecutive patients with STEMI treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI). We compared trends during two different time periods (2006-2012 vs. 2012-2018). Endpoints included mortality and major adverse cardiac events (MACE: death, repeat myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization and coronary artery bypass surgery) at 1 month, 1 and 2 years. Rates of transradial interventions have risen significantly (67.3 vs. 42.0%; P < 0.01), as have rates of prasugrel administration (69.8 vs. 4.5%; P < 0.01) and use of drug eluting stents (75.5 vs. 56.5%; P < 0.01). Both at 1 and at 2 years, MACE was significantly lower in the later period (11.6 vs. 20.9%; P < 0.01 and 18.9 vs. 25.4%; P < 0.01 respectively), whereas mortality was only significantly lower after 1 year (5.8 vs. 8.6%; P = 0.02). Cox regression identified the later period (2012-2018) to independently and favorably impact MACE (hazard ratio, -0.69; 95% CI, 0.56-0.85; P < 0.01) but not mortality (hazard ratio, -0.76; 95% CI, 0.54-1.05; P = 0.09).

CONCLUSION

Among patients treated with pPCI for STEMI, adoption of the contemporary evidence-based treatments is associated with better MACE derived outcomes, following the inception of the 2012 ESC guidelines. Nonetheless, the long-term mortality was marginally (but not significantly) lower, which indicates an unmet need for further improvement.

Primary percutaneous coronary intervention is appropriate in transient ST-elevation myocardial infarction

INTRODUCTION

Reperfusion therapy by primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) is generally indicated in patients suffering from acute myocardial infarction (MI) with ST-segment elevation (STEMI). Prior to hospital admission, full ST-segment resolution (fSTR) may occur. Optimal management of such patients with transient STEMI (TSTEMI) is potentially challenging. Our aim was to evaluate the hypothesis that in TSTEMI patients, patency of infarct related artery (IRA) is achieved before PPCI, and to compare the outcome of TSTEMI and STEMI patients during a prolonged follow-up.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Three hundred consecutive adult STEMI patients were referred to catheterization laboratory. In all patients, standard 12 lead ECGs were obtained both at the time of the first medical contact, and on catheterization laboratory admission.

RESULTS

TSTEMI occurred in 20 patients (6.7%). Despite fSTR (isoelectric ST segment), occluded IRA was found in 5 of these patients (25%). Pre-PPCI TIMI flow grade 2 was found in 6 TSTEMI patients (30%). Troponin T value at 24 h after symptom onset was lower in the TSTEMI group (1.8±2.5 mg/L vs. 3.6±3.5 mg/L, P=0.008). These patients also had a lower value of brain natriuretic peptide (156.3±119.5 ng/L vs. 438.5±429.0 ng/L, P<0.001) and higher left ventricular ejection fraction (59.9±6.3% vs. 51.6±10.2%, P<0.001). All patients were followed for a median of 5.6 years during which the overall survival did not differ between the TSTEMI and STEMI groups.

CONCLUSION

Primary PCI is strongly recommended in TSTEMI patients because of a relatively high incidence of occluded infarct related arteries. The rate of patients with TSTEMI is relatively low.

Immediate versus deferred percutaneous coronary intervention for patients with acute coronary syndrome: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Inconsistent results exist regarding the treatment effectiveness of immediate versus deferred percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of immediate versus deferred PCI in ACS patients. PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library electronic databases were systematically searched from their inception up to August 2019. Random-effects models were employed to calculate pooled relative risks (RRs) and weight mean differences (WMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A total of 10 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that recruited 3350 patients were selected for inclusion in the final meta-analysis. Four trials included patients with non-ST elevation ACS (NSTEACS), whereas the remaining six trials included patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). There were no significant differences between immediate versus deferred PCI for the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (NSTEACS patients: RR, 0.76, 95%CI, 0.33-1.75, P = 0.513; STEMI patients: RR, 1.24, 95%CI, 0.80-1.92, P = 0.335), myocardial infarction (NSTEACS patients: RR, 0.88, 95%CI, 0.27-2.81, P = 0.826; STEMI patients: RR, 0.86, 95%CI, 0.43-1.74, P = 0.678), all-cause mortality (NSTEACS patients: RR, 0.85, 95%CI, 0.38-1.88, P = 0.686; STEMI patients: RR, 1.16, 95%CI, 0.82-1.66, P = 0.407), target vessel revascularisation (NSTEACS patients: RR, 1.26, 95%CI, 0.29-5.43, P = 0.756; STEMI patients: RR, 1.01, 95%CI, 0.51-1.97, P = 0.988), or major bleeding (NSTEACS patients: RR, 0.99, 95%CI, 0.64-1.54, P = 0.972; STEMI patients: RR, 0.90, 95%CI, 0.45-1.77, P = 0.753). Although patients who underwent immediate PCI may experience increased incidences of cardiac death (RR, 1.19, 95%CI, 0.69-2.07, P = 0.525) and no or slow reflow (RR, 1.60, 95%CI, 0.91-2.84, P = 0.105), these increases were not statistically significant. We noted that immediate versus deferred PCI was associated with a reduced incidence of myocardial brush grade 3 (RR, 0.70, 95%CI, 0.56-0.88, P = 0.002); however, no significant differences were observed between immediate and deferred PCI for TIMI III flow (RR, 0.98, 95%CI, 0.93-1.03, P = 0.453), complete ST-segment resolution (RR, 0.93, 95%CI, 0.75-1.17, P = 0.548), and ejection fraction (WMD, -1.05, 95%CI, -2.58 to 0.49, P = 0.182). The findings of this study suggested that deferred PCI did not yield significant benefits for clinical endpoints. Further large-scale RCTs should be conducted to verify the findings of this study.