Rescue coronary angiography after failed thrombolysis: a real-life experience

Management of failed thrombolysis after acute myocardial infarction: An overview of current treatment options

Thrombolytic therapy remains the most commonly administered revascularization strategy for patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarctions (STEMI). However, many patients fail to have patent arteries or ST-segment resolution after these therapies. Multiple strategies have been examined to treat these patients with "failed thrombolysis." We examined the existing medical literature regarding treatment of failed thrombolysis including strategies testing repeat thrombolytic therapy and rescue percutaneous coronary intervention. Additional, we reviewed the literature regarding the efficacy of transferring patient for rescue percutaneous intervention and coronary stenting. The impact of contemporary antiplatelet strategies, cardiogenic shock, and coronary bypass surgery was examined. Overall, the management of patients with acute STEMI in whom thrombolytic therapy failed remains a challenging problem. As a result, many different strategies are currently in use. Among these therapeutic interventions, rescue PCI with coronary stenting appears to be superior when it is done in a timely manner by an experienced center.

Rescue percutaneous coronary intervention for failed thrombolysis

BACKGROUND

Previous studies of rescue percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for failed thrombolysis yielded conflicting results. In the current era of newer thrombolytic agents, coronary stents, glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors, and aggressive hemodynamic support, the outcome of this high-risk patient group has not been characterized.

METHODS

From January 2000 to October 2004, 214 consecutive patients were transferred and underwent emergent coronary angiography following failed thrombolysis. One hundred and fifty five (72%) underwent immediate PCI, 23 (11%) underwent delayed PCI, and 36 (17%) received surgical revascularization or medical therapy. Medical records and angiograms for the entire PCI cohort (n=178) were reviewed for in-hospital events including bleeding complications, stroke, recurrent ischemia or myocardial infarction (MI), target vessel revascularization (TVR), and death.

RESULTS

Time from symptom onset to thrombolysis (mean +/- standard deviation) was 5.6 +/- 11.9 hr, and time from thrombolysis to angiography was 7.0 +/- 5.5 hr. The study cohort was critically ill, with 9.6% experiencing cardiac arrest, 21% in cardiogenic shock, and 12% intubated prior to transfer. Coronary stents were placed in 88%, Rheolytic thrombectomy was used in 21%, an intraaortic balloon pump was placed in 17%, and a glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor was administered in 92%. Patients receiving delayed PCI had higher TIMI 3 flow grade at initial angiography than those receiving immediate PCI (83% vs. 34%, respectively, P < 0.0001). Angiographic success was 90% for the entire PCI cohort, 89% for the immediate PCI group, and 100% for the delayed PCI group. Clinical success (angiographic success and freedom from major adverse cardiac events) was 85% for the entire PCI cohort, 83% for the immediate PCI group, and 100% for the delayed PCI group. Severe and moderate bleeding complications occurred in 7.3%, stroke in 1.7%, recurrent ischemia or MI in 7.3%, and TVR in 3.4%. Overall, in-hospital mortality for the entire PCI cohort was 3.4%.

CONCLUSIONS

This observational, consecutive, real-world study of contemporary rescue PCI for failed thrombolysis shows a high use of coronary stents, Rheolytic thrombectomy, glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors, and intraaortic balloon pump placement. Angiographic and clinical success was high with low bleeding complications and low in-hospital mortality, suggesting that prospective, randomized trials using contemporary interventional therapy for rescue PCI be considered.

Effects and Safety of Intracoronary Thrombectomy Using Transradial Application of the PercuSurge Distal Balloon Protection System in Patients with Early or Recent Myocardial Infarction

BACKGROUND

Distal embolization and no reflow are likely during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) on the large infarct-related artery (IRA), which mostly contains high-burden thrombus formation (HBTF) and plaque burden. Mechanical devices to prevent distal atheroembolism may be of importance for preserving reperfusion and microvascular integrity in IRA.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Between May 2002 and December 2002, transradial application (TRA) of the PercuSurge GuardWire device with 7-french arterial sheath was performed in 39 consecutive patients who experienced early (>12 h and </=7 days) or recent (>7 days and <14 days) myocardial infarction (MI) associated with large IRA (vessel size >/=3.5 mm with HBTF; group 1). Between January 2001 and April 2002, 64 consecutive patients who had early or recent MI associated with HBTF in IRA of a vessel size >/=3.5 mm received TRA of PCI with adjunctive tirofiban therapy but without using the adjunctive PercuSurge GuardWire device (group 2). The angiographic and clinical outcomes of both groups were compared in a chronologically consecutive manner. The procedural success rate and post-PCI myocardial blush grades were significantly higher in group 1 than in group 2 patients (all p values <0.05), whereas a combined incidence of vascular and bleeding complications and 30-day major adverse cardiac events (defined as death, reinfarction and repeated PCI of IRA) were significantly higher in group 2 than in group 1 patients (all p values <0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggested that TRA using the PercuSurge GuardWire device during PCI for patients with early or recent MI and HBTF in IRA was safe and feasible. This mechanical device provided more additional benefit to patients in this clinical setting than a combination of conventional PCI and tirofiban therapy.

Contribution of stenting to the results of rescue PTCA

Failed thrombolysis in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is associated with increased mortality. Controversial benefit of rescue percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) in these setting has been published. The feasibility, safety, and contribution of stenting to the outcome of AMI patients treated with this strategy is unknown. We studied the angiographic result and clinical outcome of 33 patients with failed thrombolysis referred for rescue angioplasty. Twenty-three patients had stenting and 10 patients did not have stenting. Both groups had similar clinical and angiographic characteristics. Stent indications were nonoptimal result, 40%; bailout, 40%; elective, 20%. Angiographic success was 100% with stent vs. 91% with balloon alone (P < 0.8). Postprocedure residual stenosis was 1.5% (0%-10%) with stent vs. 18.05% (0%-30%) with balloon alone (P < 0.01). Thirty-day outcome with and without stent was mortality, 0% vs. 13% (P < 1.0); reinfarction, 10% vs. 0% (P < 0.30); target vessel revascularization, 0% vs. 21% (P < 0.21). The 6-month mortality was 0% with stent vs. 14% (P < 0.5). We conclude that stenting during rescue angioplasty is feasible, safe, and is associated with better immediate angiographic results. Although no obvious clinical benefit was found, a potential decrease in the revascularization rate was suggested.