English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background: Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with stent implantation has been the standard therapy in acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients. Compared with medical treatment alone, stent implanting can achieve larger lumen gain and helps to reduce the re-occlusion risk of the infarct-related artery. Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of stenting of single vessel intermediate culprit lesion stenosis to pharmacological treatment alone in acute STEMI patients. Methods: This study was prospective comparative interventional case series. It included 60 patients admitted to coronary care unit of our University hospital with acute STEMI. All patients were subjected to detailed history taking, clinical examination, 12 leads ECG, echocardiography and cardiac catheterization and angiography (TIMI flow and corrected TIMI frame count (CTFC) was reported. Patients selected were those with intermediate culprit lesion (40-70%) single vessel stenosis. Patients were divided into 2 groups: Original Research Article Shalaby et al.; JAMMR, 32(21): 99-106, 2020; Article no.JAMMR.62614 100 Group A: 30 patients who underwent stenting of the culprit lesion in addition to standard pharmacological treatment. Group B: 30 patients who received pharmacological treatment and no stenting (Glycoprotein II b/IIIa inhibitor in addition to the standard pharmacological treatment). Patients were followed up for 12 months and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) were reported (death, myocardial infarction, coronary re-vascularization, stroke and hospitalization because of heart failure). Results: 63.3% of group A patients reported complete ST segment resolution versus 30% of group B (P=0.034). TIMI Flow showed statistically significant difference in group A compared to group B regarding (P value=0.005) Group A reported slow fast blood flow (CTFC<60) in 1 patient (3.3%) while in group B it was reported in 5 patients (16%). There was a statistically significant difference between the 2 groups regarding CTFC (P value=0.029). At 12 months follow up, MACE were reported in one patient of group A versus 4 patients of group B (P value >0.05). Conclusion: Stent implantation reported better immediate efficacy and safety results among acute STEMI patients with single vessel intermediate culprit lesion stenosis and favourable effects in reducing MACE.

journal of advances in medicine and medical research

Stenting versus Pharmacological Therapy in Treatment of Single Vessel Intermediate Culprit Lesion Stenosis in Acute St-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction