Canadian VIGOUR Centre (K.R.B., P.W.A., Y.Z., C.M.W., R.C.W.), University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine (K.R.B., P.W.A., N.B., B.D.T., R.L., R.C.W.), University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2019 Oct;12(10):e008059. doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.119.008059. Epub 2019 Oct 14.
Recent clinical trial data support a pharmacoinvasive strategy as an alternative to primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. We evaluated whether this is true in a real-world prehospital ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction network using ECG assessment of reperfusion coupled with clinical outcomes within 1 year.
Of the 5583 ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients in the Alberta Vital Heart Response Program (Cohort 1 [2006-2011]: n=3593; Cohort 2 [2013-2016]: n=1990), we studied 3287 patients who received a pharmacoinvasive strategy with tenecteplase (April 2013: half-dose tenecteplase was employed in prehospital patients ≥75 years) or pPCI. ECGs were analyzed within a core laboratory; sum ST-segment deviation resolution ≥50% was defined as successful reperfusion. The primary composite was all-cause death, congestive heart failure, cardiogenic shock, and recurrent myocardial infarction within 1 year.
The pharmacoinvasive approach was administered in 1805 patients (54.9%), (493 [27.3%] underwent rescue/urgent percutaneous coronary intervention and 1312 [72.7%] had scheduled angiography); pPCI was performed in 1482 patients (45.1%). There was greater ST-segment resolution post-catheterization/percutaneous coronary intervention with a pharmacoinvasive strategy versus pPCI (75.8% versus 64.3%, IP-weighted odds ratio, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.33-1.90; <0.001). The primary composite was significantly lower with a pharmacoinvasive approach (16.3% versus 23.1%, IP-weighted hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.72-0.99; =0.033). Major bleeding and intracranial hemorrhage were similar between a pharmacoinvasive strategy and pPCI (7.6% versus 7.5%, =0.867; 0.6% versus 0.6%; =0.841, respectively). In the 82 patients ≥75 years with a prehospital pharmacoinvasive strategy, similar ST-segment resolution and rescue rates were observed with full-dose versus half-dose tenecteplase (75.8% versus 88.9%, =0.259; 31.0% versus 29.2%, =0.867) with no difference in the primary composite (31.0% versus 25.0%, =0.585).
In this large Canadian ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction registry, a pharmacoinvasive strategy was associated with improved ST-segment resolution and enhanced outcomes within 1 year compared with pPCI. Our findings support the application of a selective pharmacoinvasive reperfusion strategy when delay to pPCI exists.
最近的临床试验数据支持在 ST 段抬高型心肌梗死中采用药物介入策略作为经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(pPCI)的替代方法。我们评估了在使用心电图评估再灌注和 1 年内临床结局的真实院前 ST 段抬高型心肌梗死网络中,这是否成立。
在阿尔伯塔省生命心脏反应计划(Cohort 1[2006-2011]:n=3593;Cohort 2[2013-2016]:n=1990)的 5583 例 ST 段抬高型心肌梗死患者中,我们研究了 3287 例接受替奈普酶药物介入策略的患者(2013 年 4 月:≥75 岁的院前患者使用半剂量替奈普酶)或 pPCI。心电图由核心实验室进行分析;总和 ST 段偏移分辨率≥50%定义为成功再灌注。主要复合终点为 1 年内全因死亡、充血性心力衰竭、心源性休克和复发性心肌梗死。
1805 例患者(54.9%)采用药物介入策略,(493 例[27.3%]接受紧急经皮冠状动脉介入治疗,1312 例[72.7%]行计划造影);1482 例患者接受 pPCI。药物介入策略与 pPCI 相比,经导管/经皮冠状动脉介入术后 ST 段分辨率更高(75.8%比 64.3%,加权优势比,1.59;95%置信区间,1.33-1.90;<0.001)。药物介入策略的主要复合终点显著较低(16.3%比 23.1%,加权风险比,0.84;95%置信区间,0.72-0.99;=0.033)。药物介入策略与 pPCI 的主要出血和颅内出血发生率相似(7.6%比 7.5%,=0.867;0.6%比 0.6%;=0.841)。在≥75 岁的 82 例院前药物介入策略患者中,与半剂量替奈普酶相比,全剂量与半剂量替奈普酶的 ST 段分辨率和再通率相似(75.8%比 88.9%,=0.259;31.0%比 29.2%,=0.867),主要复合终点无差异(31.0%比 25.0%,=0.585)。
在这项加拿大大型 ST 段抬高型心肌梗死注册研究中,与 pPCI 相比,药物介入策略可改善 ST 段分辨率,并在 1 年内改善结局。我们的研究结果支持在存在 pPCI 延迟时应用选择性药物再灌注策略。