• Mateusz Tajstra, Mariusz Gasior, Andrzej Lekston, Krzysztof Wilczek, Michał Hawranek, Marek Gierlotka, Grzegorz Słonka, Tadeusz Zebik, and Lech Poloński.
• Third Chair and Department of Cardiology, Silesian Medical University, Silesian Centre for Heart Diseases, Zabrze, Poland. mateusztajstra@wp.pl
• Kardiol Pol. 2007 Nov 1; 65 (11): 1277-84; discussion 1285-6.

BackgroundIn recent years significant progress has been made in invasive treatment of patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Primary coronary stenting is currently a routine strategy which replaced primary balloon angioplasty with bailout stenting preferred in the past. Studies comparing these two strategies of stenting in AMI are scarce.AimTo compare the immediate and long-term outcomes after primary angioplasty strategy and bailout stenting versus primary stent placement strategy in patients with AMI.MethodsWe analysed data from a single-centre registry of consecutive patients with ST segment elevation myocardial infarction admitted between January 1998 and October 2003. In our centre in years 1998-2000 stenting was used only after failed or suboptimal balloon angioplasty. Starting from year 2001 we used routine primary stenting strategy. We compared these two angioplasty strategies applied in different time intervals with regard to in-hospital outcome and long-term mortality. Patients with cardiogenic shock at admission were excluded.ResultsOut of a total of 1602 patients treated invasively for AMI (cardiogenic shock excluded) 479 underwent primary balloon angioplasty strategy with bailout stenting - group 1 (years 1998-2000) and 1123 were treated with primary stenting strategy - group 2 (years 2001-2003). In group 1 bailout stenting occurred in 34.4% of patients whereas in group 2 stents were implanted in 83% of patients. Patients in the balloon angioplasty group were younger, had shorter time from the onset of symptom to hospital arrival and more frequently underwent rescue coronary intervention after failed thrombolysis. In-hospital mortality was 2.9 vs. 2.4% in groups 1 and 2, respectively (p=NS). Twenty-four month mortality rate was 9.8% in group 1 and 10.06% in group 2 (p=NS).Conclusions1. Effectiveness of coronary angioplasty is high and comparable in both groups. 2. In-hospital and long-term mortality and procedure-related complication rate are all low and comparable with both stenting strategies. 3. Independent factors increasing long-term mortality include: culprit vessel reocclusion, multivessel coronary disease, older age and hypertension. 4. Patients with complete patency of culprit vessel restored and with higher left ventricular ejection fraction presented lower 2-year mortality rate. 5. Bailout stenting did not increase 2-year mortality.

15 keywords...

hide…