Farah Alejandro, Barbagelata Alejandro
Interventional Cardiology Department, San Bernardo Hospital, Salta, Argentina.
Universidad Católica de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
F1000Res. 2017 Jul 27;6. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.10553.1. eCollection 2017.
Reperfusion therapy decreases myocardium damage during an acute coronary event and consequently mortality. However, there are unmet needs in the treatment of acute myocardial infarction, consequently mortality and heart failure continue to occur in about 10% and 20% of cases, respectively. Different strategies could improve reperfusion. These strategies, like generation of warning sign recognition and being initially assisted and transferred by an emergency service, could reduce the time to reperfusion. If the first electrocardiogram is performed en route, it can be transmitted and interpreted in a timely manner by a specialist at the receiving center, bypassing community hospitals without percutaneous coronary intervention capabilities. To administer thrombolytic therapy during transport to the catheterization laboratory could reduce time to reperfusion in cases with expected prolonged transport time to a percutaneous coronary intervention center or to a center without primary percutaneous coronary intervention capabilities with additional expected delay, known as pharmaco-invasive strategy. Myocardial reperfusion is known to produce damage and cell death, which defines the reperfusion injury. Lack of resolution of ST segment is used as a marker of reperfusion failure. In patients without ST segment resolution, mortality triples. It is important to note that, until recently, reperfusion injury and no-reflow were interpreted as a single entity and we should differentiate them as different entities; whereas no-reflow is the failure to obtain tissue flow, reperfusion injury is actually the damage produced by achieving flow. Therefore, treatment of no-reflow is obtained by tissue flow, whereas in reperfusion injury the treatment objective is protection of susceptible myocardium from reperfusion injury. Numerous trials for the treatment of reperfusion injury have been unsuccessful. Newer hypotheses such as " ", in which the interventional cardiologist assumes not only the treatment of the culprit vessel but also the way to reperfuse the myocardium at risk, could reduce reperfusion injury.
再灌注治疗可减少急性冠脉事件期间的心肌损伤,从而降低死亡率。然而,急性心肌梗死的治疗仍存在未满足的需求,因此死亡率和心力衰竭分别仍在约10%和20%的病例中发生。不同的策略可改善再灌注。这些策略,如生成警示信号识别以及由急救服务进行初始协助和转运,可缩短再灌注时间。如果在途中进行首次心电图检查,可由接收中心的专家及时传输和解读,绕过没有经皮冠状动脉介入能力的社区医院。在转运至导管室的过程中进行溶栓治疗,对于预计转运至经皮冠状动脉介入中心时间较长或转运至没有直接经皮冠状动脉介入能力且预计会有额外延迟的中心的病例,可缩短再灌注时间,这被称为药物介入策略。已知心肌再灌注会导致损伤和细胞死亡,这就是再灌注损伤的定义。ST段未恢复是再灌注失败的标志。在ST段未恢复的患者中,死亡率会增加两倍。需要注意的是,直到最近,再灌注损伤和无复流一直被视为一个单一实体,而我们应将它们区分为不同实体;无复流是无法实现组织血流,而再灌注损伤实际上是实现血流所产生的损伤。因此,无复流的治疗是通过实现组织血流,而再灌注损伤的治疗目标是保护易损心肌免受再灌注损伤。许多治疗再灌注损伤的试验都未成功。新的假说,如“ ”,介入心脏病专家不仅承担对罪犯血管的治疗,还承担对有风险心肌进行再灌注的方式,可能会减少再灌注损伤。