Warren J. Cantor

Background: The COMPLETE trial (Complete Versus Culprit-Only Revascularization to Treat Multi-Vessel Disease After Early PCI for STEMI) demonstrated that staged nonculprit lesion percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) reduced major cardiovascular events in patients with ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel coronary artery disease. It is unclear whether consistent benefit is observed in patients undergoing a pharmacoinvasive strategy compared with primary PCI. Methods: Following culprit lesion PCI, 4041 patients with ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel coronary artery disease were randomized to either routine nonculprit lesion PCI or culprit lesion only PCI. In a prespecified analysis, we determined the treatment effect in 303 patients undergoing a pharmacoinvasive strategy versus 3738 patients undergoing primary PCI on the first coprimary outcome of cardiovascular death or new myocardial infarction and the second coprimary outcome of cardiovascular death, new myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven revascularization. Results: The first coprimary was reduced with complete revascularization both in the patients undergoing a pharmacoinvasive strategy (2.1%/y versus 4.7%/y, hazard ratio, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.21–0.97]) and in patients undergoing primary PCI (2.7%/y versus 3.6%/y, hazard ratio, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.62–0.95]; interaction P =0.18). The second coprimary outcome was reduced with complete revascularization in patients undergoing a pharmacoinvasive strategy (2.3%/y versus 8.5%/y, hazard ratio, 0.28 [95% CI, 0.14–0.56]), and in patients undergoing primary PCI (3.2%/y versus 6.0%/y, hazard ratio, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.44–0.64], interaction P =0.07). Conclusions: Among patients with ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease, complete revascularization with multivessel PCI consistently reduces major cardiovascular events in patients undergoing an initial pharmacoinvasive strategy as well as in those undergoing primary PCI. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT01740479.

Objectives: To assess the relationship between preprocedural anticoagulation use and clinical and angiographic outcomes.Background: For patients with ST‐elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), the optimal timing of anticoagulant administration remains uncertain.Methods: Patients enrolled in the TOTAL trial were stratified based on whether or not they had received any parenteral anticoagulant prior to randomization and PCI. Baseline and procedural characteristics were compared. For one‐year clinical outcomes, Cox proportional modeling adjusted on a propensity score was used to analyze differences between groups. Angiographic endpoints were analyzed by logistic regression models adjusted for propensity scores.Results: In the trial, 10,064 patients were enrolled and underwent PCI. Preprocedural anticoagulation was used in 6,381 patients (63%).The most common anticoagulant was intravenous unfractionated heparin (5,188, 81%). Patients who received preprocedural anticoagulation had higher rates of TIMI‐2‐3 or TIMI‐3 flow and lower grades of thrombus prior to PCI. Pretreatment with anticoagulation was associated with lower use of bailout thrombectomy, GP IIb/IIIa inhibitors, and intra‐aortic balloon pump. After adjustment, preprocedural anticoagulation was associated with lower rates of CABG and minor bleeding at 1 year but there were no significant differences in death, stroke, recurrent MI, cardiogenic shock, or congestive heart failure.Conclusions: Preprocedural anticoagulation is associated with improved flow and reduced thrombus in the IRA prior to PCI, less bailout thrombectomy during PCI but no difference in death, recurrent infarction, or heart failure at 1 year.

Background—: Radial access is associated with less bleeding and vascular complications. However, it may delay reperfusion during primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction. Methods and Results—: A provincial database prospectively collected clinical and procedural characteristics for all urgent percutaneous coronary intervention procedures performed between June 2010 and September 2011 in Ontario for ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction, including time of arrival in the catheterization laboratory and time of first balloon inflation. After excluding patients with cardiogenic shock, with previous bypass surgery, or who received fibrinolysis, 2947 patients were included in the analysis. Propensity score matching was used to minimize difference in clinical characteristics between radial and femoral access procedures. Predictors of radial access included younger age and male sex. After propensity score matching, the median time from arrival in the cardiac catheterization laboratory to first balloon was 27 minutes (25th%–75th%, 21–34) for the femoral group and 30 minutes (25th%–75th %, 24–39) for the radial group ( P <0.001). When hospitals were stratified based on the proportion of primary percutaneous coronary intervention cases that were performed using radial access, there was no difference in treatment times between radial and femoral access in the tercile of hospitals that used radial access most frequently. There were no significant differences in the rates of death or myocardial infarction at 30 days. Conclusions—: This contemporary multicenter registry demonstrates that the time to first balloon inflation is slightly longer with radial access than with femoral access, although the 3 minute difference is unlikely to be clinically relevant. There is no difference in treatment times at hospitals that frequently use radial access for primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Short-term mortality and reinfarction rates are similar with radial and femoral access.