Short Term Outcome of Primary Precutaneous Coronary Intervention in Ostial Versus Non Ostial Culprit Proximal Left Anterior Descending Artery Acute Myocardial Infraction

Acute Myocardial Infarction

To compare short-term clinical outcomes of primary PCI between the ostial LAD-AMI and the non-ostial LAD-AMI. The primary endpoint was the major cardiovascular events (MACE) defined as being the composite of cardiac death, AMI, stent thrombosis

Current guidelines recommend percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for most patients with ST segment elevation acute myocardial infarction (STEMI) or with non ST segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTEACS) (1), (2). In STEMI patients, PCI is advised in all patients in the first 12 hours after onset of symptoms, the earlier the better (1). Coronary revascularization does not always lead to coronary reperfusion. The development of devices and procedure has improved clinical outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) to the culprit of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) (3-5). However, proximal left anterior descending artery (LAD)-AMI has still been associated with high morbidity and mortality because of the broad ischemic area (6, 7). In fact, clinical outcomes were significantly worse in the proximal LAD-AMI as compared with the mid LAD-AMI.5) Moreover, the proximal LAD disease in stable angina was closely associated with early revascularization following optimal medical therapy (8). Therefore, clinical guidelines regarding coronary revascularization have discriminated the proximal LAD disease from other LAD diseases (9). In terms of coronary revascularization, the ostial LAD disease requires special attention in the proximal LAD disease, because percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) can be more complex in the ostial LAD disease than in the non-ostial proximal LAD disease (10) even in the setting of AMI, left-main-trunk (LMT)-to-LAD crossover stenting was frequently required in the ostial LAD disease (11).

No related papers found yet.

None listed