Outcome of Stable Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction and Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery Within 48 Hours: A Single-Center, Retrospective Experience

Outcomes of Patients Presenting With Non-ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction Who Underwent Surgical Revascularization

Non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) is a leading cause of emergency hospitalization across Europe. This study evaluates the in-hospital and mid-term outcomes of patients who underwent coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) after NSTEMI. A retrospective analysis of all cases who underwent isolated CABG after NSTEMI from September 2017 to September 2022 at our center. Patients were stratified according to in-hospital survival. Patient characteristics, operative details, and procedural complications were compared between those who survived and those who did not. Predictors of in-hospital and mid-term mortality were evaluated using logistic and Cox regression modeling. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to generate a survival curve for all alive patients at the time of discharge. Among 1,011 patients (median age 64 [56 to 72] years, 852 [84.3%] male), 735 (72.7%) underwent urgent, 239 (23.6%) elective, and 37 (3.7%) emergency CABG. The in-hospital mortality was 1.5% (15/1,011 patients). Those who died were more likely to be New York Heart Association class III/IV, have left ventricular ejection fraction <21%, severe renal impairment, peripheral vascular disease (PVD), or poor mobility. Emergency procedures, preoperative ventilation, inotropic support, and intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) use were also more prevalent among those who died. Logistic regression modeling revealed new postoperative stroke (odds ratio 22.0, 95% confidence interval 3.6 to 135.5, p = 0.001), preoperative IABP use (11.4; 2.4 to 53.7, p = 0.002), new hemodialysis (9.6; 2.7 to 34.7, p <0.001), PVD (5.6; 1.6 to 20.0, p = 0.008), and poor mobility (odds ratio 4.8, 95% confidence interval 1.3 to 18.2, p = 0.022) as independent predictors of in-hospital mortality. In conclusion, new postoperative stroke, preoperative IABP use, new hemodialysis, PVD, and poor mobility are independent predictors of mortality in patients with NSTEMI who underwent isolated CABG.

Optimal Timing of Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Haemodynamically Stable Patients after Myocardial Infarction

During the acute phase of myocardial infarction, the culprit artery must be revascularized quickly with angioplasty. Surgery then completes the procedure in a second stage. If emergency surgery is performed, the resulting death rate is high; 15-20% of patients are operated on within the first 48 h after the myocardial infarction. The timing of surgical revascularization and the patient's preoperative state influence the mortality rate. We aimed to evaluate the impact of surgery delay on morbimortality. Between 2007 and 2017, a retrospective monocentric study was conducted including 477 haemodynamically stable patients after myocardial infarction who underwent an urgent coronary bypass. Three groups were described, depending on the timing of the surgery: during the first 4 days (Group 1, n = 111, 23%), 5 to 10 days (Group 2, n = 242, 51%) and after 11 days (Group 3, n = 124, 26%). The overall thirty-day mortality was 7.1% (n = 34). The death rate was significantly higher in Group 1 (n = 16; 14% vs. n = 10; 4.0% vs. n = 8; 6%, p < 0.01). The mortality risk factors identified were age (OR: 1.08; CI 95%: 1.04-1.12; p < 0.001), peripheral arteriopathy (OR: 3.31; CI 95%: 1.16-9.43; p = 0.024), preoperative renal failure (OR: 6.39; CI 95%: 2.49-15.6; p < 0.001) and preoperative ischemic recurrence (OR: 3.47; CI 95%: 1.59-7.48; p < 0.01). Ninety-two patients presented with preoperative ischemic recurrence (19%), with no difference between the groups. The optimal timing for the surgical revascularization of MI seems to be after Day 4 in stable patients. However, timing is not the only factor influencing the death rate: the patient's health condition and disease severity must be considered in the individual management strategy.

Coronary artery bypass grafting after acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction

OBJECTIVES

The study objectives were to describe the trends and outcomes of isolated coronary artery bypass grafting after ST-elevation myocardial infarction using a nationwide database.

METHODS

We queried the 2002-2016 National Inpatient Sample database for hospitalized patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction who underwent isolated coronary artery bypass grafting. We report temporal trends, predictors, and outcomes of coronary artery bypass grafting in the early (2002-2010) and recent (2011-2016) cohorts.

RESULTS

Of 3,347,470 patients hospitalized for ST-elevation myocardial infarction, 7.7% underwent isolated coronary artery bypass grafting. The incidence of isolated coronary artery bypass grafting after ST-elevation myocardial infarction decreased over time (9.2% in 2002 vs 5.5% in 2016, P_trend < .001), whereas perioperative crude in-hospital mortality did not change (5.1% in 2002 vs 4.2% in 2016, P_trend = .66), coinciding with an increase in the burden of comorbidities. There was an increase in performing isolated coronary artery bypass grafting on hospitalization day 3 or more, as well as an increase in the use of mechanical support devices and precoronary artery bypass grafting percutaneous coronary intervention. In the early cohort, isolated coronary artery bypass grafting on days 1 and 2 was associated with higher in-hospital mortality. In the recent cohort, coronary artery bypass grafting on day 2 had similar in-hospital mortality compared with day 3 or more and lower rates of acute kidney injury, ischemic stroke, ventricular arrhythmia, and length of hospital stay.

CONCLUSIONS

In this nationwide analysis, there has been a decline in the use of isolated coronary artery bypass grafting after ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Isolated coronary artery bypass grafting on day 1 was performed in sicker patients and was associated with higher in-hospital mortality than coronary artery bypass grafting performed on day 3 or more. In the recent cohort, isolated coronary artery bypass grafting on day 2 had similar in-hospital mortality compared with day 3 or more.

A simple APACHE IV risk dynamic nomogram that incorporates early admitted lactate for the initial assessment of 28-day mortality in critically ill patients with acute myocardial infarction

BACKGROUND

Early risk stratification is important for patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). We aimed to develop a simple APACHE IV dynamic nomogram, combined with easily available clinical parameters within 24 h of admission, thus improving its predictive power to assess the risk of mortality at 28 days.

METHODS

Clinical information on AMI patients was extracted from the eICU database v2.0. A preliminary XGBoost examination of the degree of association between all variables in the database and 28-day mortality was conducted. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis were used to perform screening of variables. Based on the multifactorial analysis, a dynamic nomogram predicting 28-day mortality in these patients was developed. To cope with missing data in records with missing variables, we applied the multiple imputation method. Predictive models are evaluated in three main areas, namely discrimination, calibration, and clinical validity. The discrimination is mainly represented by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), net reclassification improvement (NRI) and integrated discrimination improvement (IDI). Calibration is represented by the calibration plot. Clinical validity is represented by the decision curve analysis (DCA) curve.

RESULTS

A total of 504 people were included in the study. All 504 people were used to build the predictive model, and the internal validation model used a 500-bootstrap method. Multivariate analysis showed that four variables, APACHE IV, the first sample of admission lactate, prior atrial fibrillation (AF), and gender, were included in the nomogram as independent predictors of 28-day mortality in AMI. The prediction model had an AUC of 0.819 (95%CI 0.770-0.868) whereas the internal validation model had an AUC of 0.814 (95%CI 0.765-0.860). Calibration and DCA curves indicated that the dynamic nomogram in this study were reflective of real-world conditions and could be applied clinically. The predictive model composed of these four variables outperformed a single APACHE IV in terms of NRI and IDI. The NRI was 16.4% (95% CI: 6.1-26.8%; p = 0.0019) and the IDI was 16.4% (95% CI: 6.0-26.8%; p = 0.0020). Lactate accounted for nearly half of the total NRI, which showed that lactate was the most important of the other three variables.

CONCLUSION

The prediction model constructed by APACHE IV in combination with the first sample of admission lactate, prior AF, and gender outperformed the APACHE IV scoring system alone in predicting 28-day mortality in AMI. The prediction dynamic nomogram model was published via a website app, allowing clinicians to improve the predictive efficacy of the APACHE IV score by 16.4% in less than 1 min.

Effectiveness of LODS, OASIS, and SAPS II to predict in-hospital mortality for intensive care patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction

The relationship between three scoring systems (LODS, OASIS, and SAPS II) and in-hospital mortality of intensive care patients with ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is currently inconclusive. The baseline data, LODS score, OASIS score, SAPS II score, and in-hospital prognosis of intensive care patients with STEMI were retrieved from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care IV database. Propensity score matching analysis was performed to reduce bias. Receiver operating characteristic curves (ROC) were drawn for the three scoring systems, and comparisons between the areas under the ROC curves (AUC) were conducted. Decision curve analysis (DCA) was performed to determine the net benefits of the three scoring systems. LODS and SAPS II were independent risk factors for in-hospital mortality. For the study cohort, the AUCs of LODS, OASIS, SAPS II were 0.867, 0.827, and 0.894; after PSM, the AUCs of LODS, OASIS, SAPS II were 0.877, 0.821, and 0.881. A stratified analysis of the patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention/coronary artery bypass grafting (PCI/CABG) or not was conducted. In the PCI/CABG group, the AUCs of LODS, OASIS, SAPS II were 0.853, 0.825, and 0.867, while in the non-PCI/CABG group, the AUCs of LODS, OASIS, SAPS II were 0.857, 0.804, and 0.897. The results of the Z test suggest that the predictive value of LODS and SAPS II was not statistically different, but both were higher than OASIS. According to the DCA, the net clinical benefit of LODS was the greatest. LODS and SAPS II have excellent predictive value, and in most cases, both were higher than OASIS. With a more concise composition and greater clinical benefit, LODS may be a better predictor of in-hospital mortality for intensive care patients with STEMI.

2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Coronary Artery Revascularization: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The guideline for coronary artery revascularization replaces the 2011 coronary artery bypass graft surgery and the 2011 and 2015 percutaneous coronary intervention guidelines, providing a patient-centric approach to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with significant coronary artery disease undergoing coronary revascularization as well as the supporting documentation to encourage their use.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2019 to September 2019, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, CINHL Complete, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through May 2021, were also considered. Structure: Coronary artery disease remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. Coronary revascularization is an important therapeutic option when managing patients with coronary artery disease. The 2021 coronary artery revascularization guideline provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence for the treatment of these patients. The recommendations present an evidence-based approach to managing patients with coronary artery disease who are being considered for coronary revascularization, with the intent to improve quality of care and align with patients' interests.

Outcome of acute myocardial infarction versus stable coronary artery disease patients treated with coronary bypass surgery

OBJECTIVE

To study the long-term outcome differences between acute myocardial infarction (MI) and stable coronary artery disease (CAD) patients treated with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG).

METHODS

We studied retrospectively patients with MI (n = 1882) or stable CAD (n = 13117) treated with isolated CABG between 2004 and 2014. Inverse propensity probability weight adjustment for baseline features was used. Median follow-up was 7.9 years.

RESULTS

In-hospital mortality (8.6% vs. 1.6%; OR 5.94; p < .0001) and re-sternotomy (5.5% vs. 2.7%; OR 2.07; p < .0001) were more common in MI patients compared to stable CAD patients. Hospital surviving MI patients had higher all-cause mortality (28.2% vs. 22.2%; HR 1.37; p = .002) and MACE rate (34.4% vs. 27.4%; HR 1.22; CI 1.00-1.50; p = .049) at 10-year follow-up. Cardiovascular mortality (15.9% vs. 12.7%; HR 1.36; p = .017) and rate of new myocardial infarction (12.0% vs. 9.8%; HR 1.40; p = .034) were also higher in MI patients during follow-up. In follow-up of stabilized first-year survivors, the difference in all-cause (26.5% vs. 20.7%; HR 1.40; p = .003) and cardiovascular (14.2% vs. 11.4%; HR 1.37; p = .027) mortality continued to increase between MI and stable CAD patients.

CONCLUSION

MI patients have poorer short- and long-term outcomes compared to stable CAD patients after CABG and risk difference continues to increase with time. Key Messages Patients with myocardial infarction have poorer short- and long-term outcomes compared to stable coronary artery disease patients after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Higher risk of death continues also in stabilized first-year myocardial infarct survivors. The importance of efficient secondary prevention and follow-up highlights in post-myocardial infarct population after CABG.

The timing of surgical revascularisation in acute myocardial infarction: when should we intervene?

INTRODUCTION

Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is a crucial intervention in acute myocardial infarction (AMI), particularly when AMI is not amenable for management with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). To optimise outcome in these patients, surgical teams must consider a host of predictive factors, with the most prominent being the timing of CABG. Despite numerous studies exploring timing of CABG following AMI in the past, optimal surgical timing remains controversial. The mortality rates vary with timing of CABG, but confounding factors such as age, impaired pulmonary function, renal insufficiency, and poor left ventricular function may contribute to varied outcomes reported.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITON

An electronic literature search of articles that discussed acute myocardial presentation and urgent in-patient or elective CABG was conducted.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

The evidence was synthesised based on each reported article and their outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Current literature suggests multiple factors can guide CABG timing including, type of AMI at initial presentation, distinctive pathological status and patient characteristics. Thus, there is a need for large, multi-centre studies to identify optimal CABG timing in complex coronary artery disease or failed PCI in patients with AMI. Future guidelines should emphasise patient cohorts by taking their risk factors into consideration. As such, a need for greater cardiac screening methods and development of scoring systems can aid in the optimisation of CABG timing.

A prognostic nomogram for long-term major adverse cardiovascular events in patients with acute coronary syndrome after percutaneous coronary intervention

BACKGROUND

Accurate prediction of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) is very important for the management of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients. We aimed to construct an effective prognostic nomogram for individualized risk estimates of MACEs for patients with ACS after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

METHODS

This was a prospective study of patients with ACS after PCI from January 2013 to July 2019 (n = 2465). After removing patients with incomplete clinical information, a total of 1986 patients were randomly divided into evaluation (n = 1324) and validation (n = 662) groups. Predictors included in the nomogram were determined by a multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression model based on the training set. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and calibration curves were used to assess the discrimination and predictive accuracy of the nomogram, which were then compared with those of the classic models. The clinical utility of the nomogram was assessed by X-tile analysis and Kaplan-Meier curve analysis.

RESULTS

Independent prognostic factors, including lactate level, age, left anterior descending branch stenosis, right coronary artery stenosis, brain natriuretic peptide level, and left ventricular ejection fraction, were determined and contained in the nomogram. The nomogram achieved good areas under the ROC curve of 0.712-0.762 in the training set and 0.724-0.818 in the validation set and well-fitted calibration curves. In addition, participants could be divided into two risk groups (low and high) according to this model.

CONCLUSIONS

A simple-to-use nomogram incorporating lactate level effectively predicted 6-month, 1-year, and 4-year MACE incidence among patients with ACS after PCI.

[Coronary artery bypass grafting in myocardial infarction and unstable angina pectoris: analysis of perioperative factors. Part 1]

AIM

The purpose of this study was to assess the perioperative clinical, demographic and anatomo-angiographic factors in patients presenting with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome and being candidates for coronary artery bypass grafting, depending on the presence or absence of myocardial infarction.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Over the period from 2017 to 2018 within the framework of a single-centre register, the study enrolled a total of 166 consecutive patients admitted with non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndrome and recommended by the cardiosurgical team to undergo coronary artery bypass grafting. Depending on the outcome of acute coronary syndrome, the patients were divided into 2 groups: Group One included 98 (59%) patients with unstable angina pectoris and Group Two comprised 68 (41%) patients with myocardial infarction. A lethal outcome occurred in 2 (3%) Group Two patients prior to revascularization, hence they were not included into the analysis comparing the results of surgery in both groups, however these data were taken into consideration, being analysed separately.

RESULTS

The group of patients with myocardial infarction appeared to include significantly more female patients (20 (30.3%) versus 15 (15.3%) in the group of patients with unstable angina pectoris, p=0.02). However, by such parameters as the average age, left ventricular ejection fraction, and the frequency of diabetes mellitus the compared groups did not differ. The group with myocardial infarction was characterised by a severe clinico-angiographic status: more frequently encountered was stage II obesity (3%, n=3 in the first group and 10.6% n=7 in the second group, p=0.04). On the whole, the majority of patients were at intermediate and high risk (44.7% in the group with unstable angina pectoris versus 81.8% in the group of myocardial infarction, p<0.05). Group Two patients significantly more often presented with three-vessel lesions of the coronary bed (40 (40.8%) and 39 (59%), p=0.02). The level of low-density lipoproteins appeared to be significantly higher in patients with myocardial infarction (3.3±1 mmol/l and 2.9±0.9, p=0.04). In the same group more often encountered were peripheral artery lesions (28 (21%) and 12 (11.3%), p=0.04). In its turn, in the group of unstable angina pectoris, there were significantly more patients having received dual antithrombotic therapy prior to surgery (44 (44.9%) and 17 (25%), p=0.01). Approximately half of the patients in the first group (53%, n=52) had a history of myocardial infarction (p=0.001).

CONCLUSION

The obtained findings suggested that amongst the patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome resulting in myocardial infarction prevailing were those of female gender, with obesity, as a consequence, hyperholesterolaemia and triple-vessel disease. At the same time, postinfarction cardiosclerosis, renal dysfunction, and haemodynamically significant lesions of lower-extremity arteries were encountered in the group of unstable angina pectoris.

Outcomes After ST-Segment Versus Non-ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Revascularized by Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting

The objectives of this study were to investigate the outcome differences between ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) patients treated with coronary artery bypass grafting surgery (CABG). We conducted a multicenter, retrospective cohort follow-up study of consecutive patients with STEMI (surgery ≤48 hours of admission; n = 348) or NSTEMI (n = 1,160) revascularized with first-time isolated CABG in Finland using nationwide registries (median age 68 years, 24% women). The short- and long-term (10-year) outcomes were studied with inverse propensity probability weight adjustment for baseline features. The median follow-up was 5.2 years. In-hospital mortality (11.4% vs 5.3%; adj. odds ratio [OR] 2.27; confidence interval [CI] 1.41 to 3.66; p = 0.001) and re-sternotomy rates (6.9% vs 3.5%; adj. OR 2.07; CI 1.22 to 3.51; p = 0.007) were higher in STEMI patients. Long-term all-cause mortality did not differ between STEMI and NSTEMI patients among all operated patients (30.2% vs 28.3%; adj. HR 1.30; CI 0.97 to 1.75; p = 0.080) or hospital survivors (21.6 vs 24.3%; HR 0.93; CI 0.64 to 1.36; p = 0.713). Occurrence of major adverse cardiovascular event in hospital survivors within 10 years was 34.7% in STEMI versus 29.6% in NSTEMI (adj. HR 1.24; CI 0.88 to 1.76; p = 0.220). Occurrences of cardiovascular death (14.6% vs 14.4%; p = 0.773), myocardial infarction (MI; 15.2% vs 10.3%; p = 0.203), and stroke (10.8% vs 14.8%; p = 0.242) were also comparable. In conclusion, patients with STEMI have poorer short-term outcome compared to NSTEMI patients after revascularization by CABG, but the long-term outcomes are comparable regardless of MI type. Thus, both short- and long-term risks should be considered when evaluating patient´s for CABG eligibility by MI type.

Delay in coronary artery bypass grafting for STEMI patients improves hospital morbidity and mortality

Objectives

The optimal timing of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with ST elevated acute myocardial infarction (STEMI) is unclear. The purpose of the study is to evaluate and compare the outcomes in STEMI patients who underwent CABG within the various time intervals within the first 7 days of either emergent or urgent hospital admission.

Methods

Patients aged 30 years old and older diagnosed with STEMI who underwent CABG within first 7 days after non-elective hospital admission were selected from the National Inpatient Sample 2010–2014 using the appropriate ICD-9-CM diagnosis and procedure codes. These patients were divided into 3 cohorts based on timing of surgery: within 24 h (group A), 2nd-3rd day (group B), and 4th–7th day (group C). The rates of postoperative complications, mortality, and postoperative hospital length of stay (LOS) were compared using the Chi-square test, multivariable logistic regression analysis, and Wilcoxon rank sum test.

Results

A total of 5963 patients were identified: group A = 28.5%, group B = 36.1%, group C = 35.4%. Mean age overall was 63.1 ± 11.1 years; 76.9% were males and 72.9% were whites. Compared to groups B and C, patients in group A were more likely to develop cardiac complications (OR [odds ratio] =1.33, 95%CI [confidence interval] 1.12–1.59 and OR = 1.39, 95%CI 1.17–1.67, respectively) and respiratory complications (OR = 1.31, 95%CI 1.13–1.51 and OR = 1.53, 95%CI 1.32–1.78, respectively). They were also more likely to have renal complications (OR = 1.31, 95%CI 1.11–1.54) and bleeding (OR = 1.20, 95%CI 1.05–1.37) than patients in group B and had a similar tendency compared to group C. We did not find significant differences in the above complications between groups B and C. Postoperative stroke and sternal wound infection rates were similar between all three groups. In-hospital mortality was also higher in group A (8.2%) compared to group B (3.5%) and group C (2.9%, P < 0.0001 for both); differences between groups B and C were not significant. This was confirmed in the multivariable logistic regression analysis with controlling for age, gender, race, the Elixhauser Comorbidity Index, and complications (group A vs B: OR = 1.85, 95%CI 1.52–2.25; group A vs C: OR = 2.21; 95%CI 1.82–2.68). Patients in group A had a significantly longer postoperative LOS (median 7 days with IQR [interquartile range] 5–10 days) compared to those in group B (median 6 days, IQR 5–8 days) and group C (median 6 days, IQR 4–8 days; P < 0.0001 for both).

Conclusions

The results of this study show that despite the urgency and severity of STEMI, patients who undergo CABG within the first 24 h after non-elective hospital admission have increased hospital morbidity and mortality. These findings suggest that a delay in surgery beyond the first 24 h may be beneficial to patient outcomes. Furthermore, there is a significant cost effectiveness when the patients delay surgery because the hospital length of stay is reduced as well as the subsequent hospital costs.

Cardiac surgery in acute myocardial infarction: crystalloid versus blood cardioplegia - an experimental study

BACKGROUND

Because hearts in acute myocardial infarction are often prone to ischemia-reperfusion damage during cardiac surgery, we investigated the influence of intracellular crystalloid cardioplegia solution (CCP) and extracellular blood cardioplegia solution (BCP) on cardiac function, metabolism, and infarct size in a rat heart model of myocardial infarction.

METHODS

Following euthanasia, the hearts of 50 rats were quickly excised, cannulated, and inserted into a blood-perfused isolated heart apparatus. A regional myocardial infarction was created in the infarction group (18 hearts) for 120 min; the control group (32 hearts) was not subjected to infarction. In each group, either Buckberg BCP or Bretschneider CCP was administered for an aortic clamping time of 90 min. Functional parameters were recorded during reperfusion: coronary blood flow, left ventricular developed pressure (LVDP) and contractility (dp/dt max). Infarct size was determined by planimetry. The results were compared between the groups using analysis of variance or parametric tests, as appropriate.

RESULTS

Cardiac function after acute myocardial infarction, 90 min of cardioplegic arrest, and 90 min of reperfusion was better preserved with Buckberg BCP than with Bretschneider CCP relative to baseline (BL) values (LVDP 54 ± 11% vs. 9 ± 2.9% [p = 0.0062]; dp/dt max. 73 ± 11% vs. 23 ± 2.7% [p = 0.0001]), whereas coronary flow was similarly impaired (BCP 55 ± 15%, CCP 63 ± 17% [p = 0.99]). The infarct in BCP-treated hearts was smaller (25% of myocardium) and limited to the area of coronary artery ligation, whereas in CCP hearts the infarct was larger (48% of myocardium; p = 0.029) and myocardial necrosis was distributed unevenly to the left ventricular wall.

CONCLUSIONS

In a rat model of acute myocardial infarction followed by cardioplegic arrest, application of BCP leads to better myocardial recovery than CCP.

Meta-Analysis Comparing Dual Versus Single Antiplatelet Therapy in Combination With Antithrombotic Therapy in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Who Underwent Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Stent Implantation

The coexistence of atrial fibrillation and coronary artery disease is commonly found in clinical practice. The aim of this meta-analysis is to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of dual versus single antiplatelet therapy in combination with antithrombotic therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science databases were systematically evaluated for articles published up to October 31, 2017. The risk ratios (RR) were extracted from each study. Pooled estimates with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated by a fixed or random-effects model. Eight studies involving a total of 10,861 patients with atrial fibrillation were included in this meta-analysis. Five thousand sixty-six participants received dual antiplatelet therapy together with warfarin or new oral anticoagulation (triple antithrombotic therapy, TT) and 5,795 participants received single antiplatelet therapy together with warfarin or new oral anticoagulation (dual antithrombotic therapy). TT was associated with a significantly higher incidence of all (RR 1.45, p <0.001) and major (RR 1.77, p <0.001) bleeding events, but no difference with regard to stroke, in-stent thrombosis, major adverse cardiovascular events, and all-cause mortality rate. In conclusion, as compared to TT, dual antithrombotic therapy is equally effective in reducing stroke, in-stent thrombosis, major adverse cardiovascular events, and all-cause mortality rate, but shows beneficial effect in reducing overall bleeding incidence in atrial fibrillation patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention.