Stent Versus Non-Stent in Treating Intermediate Stenosis Culprit Lesions in Acute ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Patients.

Abstract

To investigate the efficacy and safety of stent versus non-stent in treating acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients with single vessel disease and intermediate stenosis culprit lesions.Between September 2009 and May 2015, 475 acute STEMI patients (time from symptom onset < 12 hours) with single vessel disease and intermediate stenosis culprit lesions were retrospectively studied at Beijing Anzhen Hospital. The patients were divided into a stent group (n = 308) and non-stent group (n = 167) based on whether they received stent implantation or not during primary coronary angiography.During follow-up, the stent group patients had a lower major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event (MACCE) rate than the non-stent group: 5.5% versus 12.0%; P = 0.01; hazard ratio (HR) 0.35 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.180.69]). The nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI) rate was lower in the stent group (2.9% versus 7.2%, P = 0.03). The cardiac death rate (1.9% versus 3%, P = 0.45) and stroke (0.6% versus 1.8%, P = 0.35) rate were similar between the stent and non-stent groups. The two groups shared similar all cause death rates: 4.9% versus 5.4%, respectively, P = 0.81; HR: 1.23 [95%CI: 0.51-2.99]. The composite ischemia outcome of death/MI/stroke was lower in the stent group (8.1% versus 14.4%, P = 0.02). The stent and non-stent groups had similar repeat revascularization rates (10.1% versus 11.4%, P = 0.67); ischemia driven readmission (19.5% versus 15.0%, P = 0.27), and bleeding (1.3% versus 1.2%, P = 1) rates.Stent implantation has a better efficacy and safety in reducing adverse ischemia events in acute STEMI patients with single vessel disease and intermediate stenosis culprit lesions.