Repository logo
  • English
  • Srpski (lat)
  • Српски
Log In
Have you forgotten your password?
  1. Home
  2. Browse by Author

Browsing by Author "Renlund, Henrik (36351070000)"

Filter results by typing the first few letters
Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Results Per Page
  • Sort Options
  • Loading...
    Thumbnail Image
    Some of the metrics are blocked by your 
    consent settings
    Publication
    Clinical impact of direct stenting and interaction with thrombus aspiration in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: Thrombectomy Trialists Collaboration
    (2018)
    Mahmoud, Karim D. (36995868900)
    ;
    Jolly, Sanjit S. (55584797122)
    ;
    James, Stefan. (34769603200)
    ;
    Džavík, Vladimír (7004450973)
    ;
    Cairns, John A. (7201705929)
    ;
    Olivecrona, Goran K. (8656313100)
    ;
    Renlund, Henrik (36351070000)
    ;
    Gao, Peggy (35069449800)
    ;
    Lagerqvist, Bo (6701708620)
    ;
    Alazzoni, Ashraf (38661112400)
    ;
    Kedev, Sasko (23970691700)
    ;
    Stankovic, Goran (59150945500)
    ;
    Meeks, Brandi (23107081600)
    ;
    Frøbert, Ole (7003840907)
    ;
    Zijlstra, Felix (57220542659)
    Aims Preliminary studies suggest that direct stenting (DS) during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) may reduce microvascular obstruction and improve clinical outcome. Thrombus aspiration may facilitate DS. We assessed the impact of DS on clinical outcome and myocardial reperfusion and its interaction with thrombus aspiration among ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients undergoing PCI. Methods and results Patient-level data from the three largest randomized trials on routine manual thrombus aspiration vs. PCI only were merged. A 1:1 propensity matched population was created to compare DS and conventional stenting. Synergy between DS and thrombus aspiration was assessed with interaction P-values in the final models. In the unmatched population (n= 17 329), 32% underwent DS and 68% underwent conventional stenting. Direct stenting rates were higher in patients randomized to thrombus aspiration as compared with PCI only (41% vs. 22%; P < 0.001). Patients undergoing DS required less contrast (162mL vs. 172mL; P< 0.001) and had shorter fluoroscopy time (11.1min vs. 13.3 min; P< 0.001). After propensity matching (n= 10 944), no significant differences were seen between DS and conventional stenting with respect to 30-day cardiovascular death [1.7% vs. 1.9%; hazard ratio 0.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55-1.41; P=0.60; Pinteraction = 0.96) and 30-day stroke or transient ischaemic attack (0.6% vs. 0.4%; odds ratio 1.02; 95% CI 0.14-7.54; P=0.99; Pinteraction = 0.81). One-year results were similar. No significant differences were seen in electrocardiographic and angiographic myocardial reperfusion measures. Conclusion Direct stenting rates were higher in patients randomized to thrombus aspiration. Clinical outcomes and myocardial reperfusion measures did not differ significantly between DS and conventional stenting and there was no interaction with thrombus aspiration. © The Author(s) 2018.
  • Loading...
    Thumbnail Image
    Some of the metrics are blocked by your 
    consent settings
    Publication
    FFR-Guided Complete or Culprit-Only PCI in Patients with Myocardial Infarction
    (2024)
    Böhm, Felix (7007035623)
    ;
    Mogensen, Brynjölfur (7003995909)
    ;
    Engstrøm, Thomas (7004069840)
    ;
    Stankovic, Goran (59150945500)
    ;
    Srdanovic, Ilija (6506056556)
    ;
    Lønborg, Jacob (12240126300)
    ;
    Zwackman, Sammy (57222371591)
    ;
    Hamid, Mehmet (56624008800)
    ;
    Kellerth, Thomas (59852157900)
    ;
    Lauermann, Jörg (57195955901)
    ;
    Kajander, Olli A. (6603592918)
    ;
    Andersson, Jonas (57614259700)
    ;
    Linder, Rikard (7102201002)
    ;
    Angerås, Oskar (55580696900)
    ;
    Renlund, Henrik (36351070000)
    ;
    Ērglis, Andrejs (6602259794)
    ;
    Menon, Madhav (57190861283)
    ;
    Schultz, Carl (7202476533)
    ;
    Laine, Mika (55481374000)
    ;
    Held, Claes (7005675618)
    ;
    Rück, Andreas (7006743933)
    ;
    Östlund, Ollie (36060009000)
    ;
    James, Stefan (34769603200)
    BACKGROUND The benefit of fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided complete revascularization in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and multivessel coronary artery disease remains unclear. METHODS In this multinational, registry-based, randomized trial, we assigned patients with STEMI or very-high-risk non-STEMI (NSTEMI) and multivessel disease who were undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of the culprit lesion to receive either FFR-guided complete revascularization of nonculprit lesions or no further revascularization. The primary outcome was a composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, or unplanned revascularization. The two key secondary outcomes were a composite of death from any cause or myocardial infarction and unplanned revascularization. RESULTS A total of 1542 patients underwent randomization, with 764 assigned to receive FFR-guided complete revascularization and 778 assigned to receive culprit-lesion-only PCI. At a median follow-up of 4.8 years (interquartile range, 4.3 to 5.2), a primary-outcome event had occurred in 145 patients (19.0%) in the complete-revascularization group and in 159 patients (20.4%) in the culprit-lesion-only group (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74 to 1.17; P=0.53). With respect to the secondary outcomes, no apparent between-group differences were observed in the composite of death from any cause or myocardial infarction (hazard ratio, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.87 to 1.44) or unplanned revascularization (hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.56 to 1.04). There were no apparent between-group differences in safety outcomes. CONCLUSIONS Among patients with STEMI or very-high-risk NSTEMI and multivessel coronary artery disease, FFR-guided complete revascularization was not shown to result in a lower risk of a composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, or unplanned revascularization than culprit-lesion-only PCI at 4.8 years. Copyright © 2024 Massachusetts Medical Society.
  • Loading...
    Thumbnail Image
    Some of the metrics are blocked by your 
    consent settings
    Publication
    Thrombus Aspiration in ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: An Individual Patient Meta-Analysis: Thrombectomy Trialists Collaboration
    (2017)
    Jolly, Sanjit S. (55584797122)
    ;
    James, Stefan (34769603200)
    ;
    Džavík, Vladimír (7004450973)
    ;
    Cairns, John A. (7201705929)
    ;
    Mahmoud, Karim D. (36995868900)
    ;
    Zijlstra, Felix (57220542659)
    ;
    Yusuf, Salim (7202749318)
    ;
    Olivecrona, Goran K. (8656313100)
    ;
    Renlund, Henrik (36351070000)
    ;
    Gao, Peggy (35069449800)
    ;
    Lagerqvist, Bo (6701708620)
    ;
    Alazzoni, Ashraf (38661112400)
    ;
    Kedev, Sasko (23970691700)
    ;
    Stankovic, Goran (59150945500)
    ;
    Meeks, Brandi (23107081600)
    ;
    Frøbert, Ole (7003840907)
    Background: Thrombus aspiration during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for the treatment of ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) has been widely used; however, recent trials have questioned its value and safety. In this meta-analysis, we, the trial investigators, aimed to pool the individual patient data from these trials to determine the benefits and risks of thrombus aspiration during PCI in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction. Methods: Included were large (n≥1000), randomized, controlled trials comparing manual thrombectomy and PCI alone in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction. Individual patient data were provided by the leadership of each trial. The prespecified primary efficacy outcome was cardiovascular mortality within 30 days, and the primary safety outcome was stroke or transient ischemic attack within 30 days. Results: The 3 eligible randomized trials (TAPAS [Thrombus Aspiration During Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Acute Myocardial Infarction], TASTE [Thrombus Aspiration in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction in Scandinavia], and TOTAL [Trial of Routine Aspiration Thrombectomy With PCI Versus PCI Alone in Patients With STEMI]) enrolled 19 047 patients, of whom 18 306 underwent PCI and were included in the primary analysis. Cardiovascular death at 30 days occurred in 221 of 9155 patients (2.4%) randomized to thrombus aspiration and 262 of 9151 (2.9%) randomized to PCI alone (hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.70-1.01; P=0.06). Stroke or transient ischemic attack occurred in 66 (0.8%) randomized to thrombus aspiration and 46 (0.5%) randomized to PCI alone (odds ratio, 1.43; 95% confidence interval, 0.98-2.10; P=0.06). There were no significant differences in recurrent myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, heart failure, or target vessel revascularization. In the subgroup with high thrombus burden (TIMI [Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction] thrombus grade ≥3), thrombus aspiration was associated with fewer cardiovascular deaths (170 [2.5%] versus 205 [3.1%]; hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.65-0.98; P=0.03) and with more strokes or transient ischemic attacks (55 [0.9%] versus 34 [0.5%]; odds ratio, 1.56; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-2.42, P=0.04). However, the interaction P values were 0.32 and 0.34, respectively. Conclusions: Routine thrombus aspiration during PCI for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction did not improve clinical outcomes. In the high thrombus burden group, the trends toward reduced cardiovascular death and increased stroke or transient ischemic attack provide a rationale for future trials of improved thrombus aspiration technologies in this high-risk subgroup. Clinical Trial Registration: URLs: http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov http://www.crd.york.ac.UK/prospero/. Unique identifiers: NCT02552407 and CRD42015025936. © 2017 American Heart Association, Inc.

Built with DSpace-CRIS software - Extension maintained and optimized by 4Science

  • Privacy policy
  • End User Agreement
  • Send Feedback