JACC Cardiovasc Interv. Postprocedural TIMI flow grade 3 was achieved in 60.0% and 76.7% of the intracoronary and intralesional groups, respectively (P = 0.307). Postprocedural MBG grade 3 was achieved in 53.3% and 70.0% in intracoronary and intralesional groups, respectively (P = 0.479). There was no significant difference between the groups in no-reflow assessment. Moreover, no significant difference was seen between the two groups in secondary end-point analysis. CONCLUSION Both methods of intracoronary and intralesional eptifibatide administration during primary PCI in patients with acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) were safe and comparable in myocardial perfusion outcomes. strong class=”kwd-title” Keywords: Myocardial Perfusion Imaging, Eptifibatide, Myocardial Infarction Introduction Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is the standard treatment for patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI).1 Embolism, thrombus and vascular debris toward the distal vascular bed may occur during PCI which impairs myocardial perfusion, and thus aggravates clinical outcomes.2 Furthermore, microvascular occlusion can occur in the large proportion of patients that undergoing successful PCI which will be associated with increased infarct size, reduced ventricular Penicillin V potassium salt systolic Penicillin V potassium salt function, and increased mortality.3 In order to prevent and treat distal embolization and improve myocardial perfusion, the specialists can use mechanical and/or pharmacological intervention methods that will improve clinical outcomes in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).4,5 As a conventional method, glycoprotein (GP) inhibitors injection into infarcted vessels will increase drug concentration dramatically, and thus reduces available GP IIb/IIIa receptors to bind to fibrinogens in the microvessels.6 Previous studies have proved that intracoronary injection of eptifibatide (as a GP IIb/IIIa receptors inhibitor) is more effective in reduction of infarct size and clinical outcomes without significant increase in major bleeding than intravenous injection in the patients with AMI.5-7 As a novelty, we hypothesized that intralesional eptifibatide injection could be more effective than intracoronary injection, because drug infusion through guiding catheter (situated in the left main or right coronary artery) causes drug back flow to the aorta and simultaneous drug entry into Penicillin V potassium salt the normal vessels. So, the aim of our study was to compare eptifibatide localized and intracoronary injection on myocardial perfusion improvement and its outcomes. Materials and Methods em Study participants and design: /em This was a randomized clinical trial study reviewed Col4a3 and approved by the research ethics committees in Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran, and registered by the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials (IRCT number: IRCT2016122722134N4). All patients gave written informed consent to participate in the study. A total of 160 patients with AMI diagnosis who presented to Shahid Chamran Heart Center (Isfahan, Iran) were selected. Inclusion criterion was diagnosis of STEMI as defined by chest pain suggestive for myocardial ischemia for at least 30 minutes before hospital admission, and symptoms onset time less than 12 hours with 1 mm ST-segment elevation in 2 or more contiguous leads (for V1-V3, ST elevation was 2 mm) simultaneously. These patients should also have thrombus burden grade three or more around the angiography. Thrombus burden (TB) was graded (G) as G0 = no thrombus, G1 = possible thrombus, G2 = small (greatest dimension 1/2 vessel diameter), G3 = moderate ( 1/2 but 2 vessel diameter), G4 =.
- [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]Gameiro PA, Yang JJ, Metelo AM, Perez-Carro R, Baker R, Wang ZW, Arreola A, Rathmell WK, Olumi A, Lopez-Larrubia P, et al
- and indicate the (PDB code 2YHH) The -strands, turns and -hairpins, are colored crimson, green and red, respectively