DOI: 10.4244/EIJV9I8A149

Reflections on STEMI

Patrick W. Serruys, Editor in Chief

The management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation (STEMI) remains a very topical subject within interventional cardiology. For instance, there was the recent PRAMI presentation at last September’s ESC annual meeting in Amsterdam1 as well as at this year’s TCT which carried the discussion even further.

But what makes STEMI so interesting?

Today we are seeing an ever increasing volume of studies presented and published and, in terms of cardiovascular disease, life expectancy has increased dramatically with mortality rates halved in the last 60 years. This significant drop in mortality began in earnest with the seminal endeavours of Andreas Grüntzig, the publication of the TIMI study and, in the mid 1990s, the ascension of PCI deemed superior to fibrinolysis, with the publication of no fewer than 23 randomised trials (PCI vs. Lysis).

Yet, despite the advances achieved over these decades, controversy still remains. Should we return to thrombolysis instead of manual thrombectomy? A recent paper even suggested that thrombus aspiration without coronary stenting might become a primary revascularisation procedure2. At the ESC, the TASTE data contradicted the TAPAS data, and now, to confuse things even more, we will have to wait for the result of TOTAL, where patient enrolment has been increased, indicating a positive signal for manual thrombectomy. However, as things now stand, it is unclear which solution is best in this tangled web.

Should we treat more than the culprit lesion during primary PCI?

In EuroIntervention we published a STEMI paper which concluded that acute multivessel PCI in patients with STEMI was associated with increased mortality3. However, in this month’s issue, Jaguszewski et al4 conclude that multivessel PCI does not appear to be associated with higher mortality after stratifying patients based on their risk. Thus, multivessel PCI in STEMI can be a good clinical choice but requires stratification: the Gershlick group is testing this concept5.

When we look at ECMO and Impella (which are more often applied in cardiogenic shock), the impact on mortality has yet to be demonstrated. What is encouraging, however, is that not only surgeons but also interventionalists use these therapies.

Another therapy, namely intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP), is losing ground. Holger Thiel’s group showed that left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) were superior to balloon pumps. However, not much progress has been made in MI size reduction, either with preconditioning or with the application of new medication.

With respect to the PCI approach, the radial approach for STEMI seems to be the preferred option. Concerning stents, the recent EXAMINATION and COMFORTABLE studies showed that DES is superior to BMS for stent thrombosis and TLR.

In conclusion, the current interest in STEMI has led to a vast array of pathways and avenues all of which need to be further explored and elucidated.


References

Volume 9 Number 8
Dec 27, 2013
Volume 9 Number 8
View full issue


Key metrics

Trending articles
151.43

State-of-the-Art

10.4244/EIJ-D-22-00776 Apr 3, 2023
Computed tomographic angiography in coronary artery disease
Serruys PW et al
free
55.9

Clinical research

10.4244/EIJ-D-22-00621 Feb 20, 2023
Long-term changes in coronary physiology after aortic valve replacement
Sabbah M et al
free
54.9

Expert review

10.4244/EIJ-D-21-01010 Jun 24, 2022
Device-related thrombus following left atrial appendage occlusion
Simard T et al
free
43.75

Clinical Research

10.4244/EIJ-D-21-01091 Aug 5, 2022
Lifetime management of patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis: a computed tomography simulation study
Medranda G et al
free
39.95

Clinical research

10.4244/EIJ-D-22-00558 Feb 6, 2023
Permanent pacemaker implantation and left bundle branch block with self-expanding valves – a SCOPE 2 subanalysis
Pellegrini C et al
free
X

The Official Journal of EuroPCR and the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI)

EuroPCR EAPCI
PCR ESC
Impact factor: 7.6
2023 Journal Citation Reports®
Science Edition (Clarivate Analytics, 2024)
Online ISSN 1969-6213 - Print ISSN 1774-024X
© 2005-2024 Europa Group - All rights reserved