These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Impact of platelet inhibition level on subsequent no-reflow in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.
    Author: Aitmokhtar O, Paganelli F, Benamara S, Azaza A, Bonello L, Hamza O, Seddiki S, Benathmane T, Saidane M, Bouzid A, Kara M, Sik A, Azzouz A, Harbi F, Monsuez JJ, Benkhedda S.
    Journal: Arch Cardiovasc Dis; 2017 Nov; 110(11):626-633. PubMed ID: 28583820.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: High P2Y12 platelet reactivity (PR) level after primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) affects prognosis and may induce the no-reflow phenomenon. AIM: To investigate the role of PR in the genesis of microvascular obstruction. METHODS: Patients with STEMI undergoing PPCI within 12hours of symptoms onset were included prospectively. All patients received a 600mg clopidogrel-loading dose before PPCI and 250mg aspirin. PR was measured thereafter during PPCI while wiring the culprit lesion and before coronary dilatation, using the P2Y12 VerifyNow® assay. No-reflow was defined as ST-segment regression<50% observed 90minutes after PPCI. RESULTS: Between January 2014 and November 2015, 140 STEMI patients were included, and divided into two groups: a low PR group (LPR) defined as PR<209P2Y12 reaction units (PRU); and a high PR group (HPR) defined as PR≥209PRU. There were no differences in baseline characteristics between LPR and HPR groups, including age (57.8±11.9 vs. 59.4±13.2 years, respectively; P=0.44) and weight (76.1±15.1 vs. 74.8±10.9kg, respectively; P=0.55). Delay to revascularization was 270.1±175.5 vs. 295.6±206.2minutes (P=0.49) and time between clopidogrel-loading and PR measurement was 53±37 vs 65±54minutes (P=0.29) in the LPR and HPR groups, respectively. No-reflow was more frequent in the HPR group (44 [47.3%] vs. 9 [19.1%]; P=0.0012). Mean PR was higher in patients with no-reflow: 268.3±53 vs. 223.8±50.1 PRU (P=0.002). In multivariable analysis, HPR was an independent predictor of no-reflow. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.745 (0.654, 0.835); the cut-off value predicting no-reflow was 254PRU. CONCLUSION: High PR level measured at PPCI is independently associated with no-reflow.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]