Novel high-burden thrombus criterion: Thrombectomy plus thrombolysis improves microvascular resistance in myocardial infarction.

IF 3.2 2区 医学 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Huaizhi Lu, Yanbin Zhang, Pengwei Yang, Hui Zhao, Yanwei Zhu, Xuesheng Xu
{"title":"Novel high-burden thrombus criterion: Thrombectomy plus thrombolysis improves microvascular resistance in myocardial infarction.","authors":"Huaizhi Lu, Yanbin Zhang, Pengwei Yang, Hui Zhao, Yanwei Zhu, Xuesheng Xu","doi":"10.1016/j.ijcard.2025.133970","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) thrombus grade has long been used to assess thrombus burden and guide treatment strategies. However, this grading system may not fully capture the complexities of thrombus management during PCI, which has caused potential biases in the selection and application of thrombectomy and coronary thrombolysis in large-scale randomized trials. To address this limitation, a novel high-burden thrombus criterion is proposed, defined as TIMI thrombus grade 4-5 after balloon angioplasty with a 2.0 mm balloon. A retrospective observational study was conducted to evaluate the clinical outcomes of combined thrombectomy/thrombolysis in high-burden thrombus patients, focusing on microcirculatory improvement and reperfusion.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective observational study included 175 STEMI patients who underwent emergency PCI and met the novel high-burden thrombus criterion. Patients were classified into three groups according to intraoperative thrombus management strategies: thrombectomy alone, coronary thrombolysis alone, and combined thrombectomy/thrombolysis. Myocardial microcirculatory function was assessed using the index of microvascular resistance (IMR) and TIMI frame count (TFC), and their correlations with left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) were analyzed. IMR reflects microvascular resistance, with higher values indicating poorer myocardial perfusion.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No significant differences were observed in baseline clinical characteristics, infarct-related artery, stent implantation, or other factors among the three groups. The IMR in the combined thrombectomy/thrombolysis group was significantly lower than in the thrombectomy group and the thrombolysis group (26.07 ± 12.45 vs. 34.67 ± 11.79 vs. 32.97 ± 13.70, P < 0.01). TFC was also lower in the combined group compared with the other two groups (22.04 ± 9.94 vs. 28.70 ± 12.82 vs. 31.00 ± 12.69, P < 0.01). Compared with the thrombectomy and thrombolysis groups, the combined group demonstrated a higher EF and a lower LVEDd (56.91 ± 7.96 vs. 52.02 ± 10.85 vs. 53.22 ± 7.39, P < 0.01; 49.89 ± 3.78 vs. 50.51 ± 4.33 vs. 54.11 ± 5.39, P < 0.01). Correlation analysis revealed a significant negative association between IMR and EF (ρ = -0.256, P < 0.01). Additionally, symptom onset-to-balloon time (SOBT) correlated significantly with both IMR and TFC (ρ > 0.2, P < 0.01).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The novel high-burden thrombus criterion provides a precise framework for guiding thrombus management strategies in clinical practice. In STEMI patients with high-burden thrombi after balloon angioplasty, combined thrombectomy/thrombolysis significantly reduces postoperative IMR, improves myocardial perfusion, facilitates left ventricular recovery, and enhances overall prognosis.</p>","PeriodicalId":13710,"journal":{"name":"International journal of cardiology","volume":" ","pages":"133970"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2025.133970","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) thrombus grade has long been used to assess thrombus burden and guide treatment strategies. However, this grading system may not fully capture the complexities of thrombus management during PCI, which has caused potential biases in the selection and application of thrombectomy and coronary thrombolysis in large-scale randomized trials. To address this limitation, a novel high-burden thrombus criterion is proposed, defined as TIMI thrombus grade 4-5 after balloon angioplasty with a 2.0 mm balloon. A retrospective observational study was conducted to evaluate the clinical outcomes of combined thrombectomy/thrombolysis in high-burden thrombus patients, focusing on microcirculatory improvement and reperfusion.

Methods: This retrospective observational study included 175 STEMI patients who underwent emergency PCI and met the novel high-burden thrombus criterion. Patients were classified into three groups according to intraoperative thrombus management strategies: thrombectomy alone, coronary thrombolysis alone, and combined thrombectomy/thrombolysis. Myocardial microcirculatory function was assessed using the index of microvascular resistance (IMR) and TIMI frame count (TFC), and their correlations with left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) were analyzed. IMR reflects microvascular resistance, with higher values indicating poorer myocardial perfusion.

Results: No significant differences were observed in baseline clinical characteristics, infarct-related artery, stent implantation, or other factors among the three groups. The IMR in the combined thrombectomy/thrombolysis group was significantly lower than in the thrombectomy group and the thrombolysis group (26.07 ± 12.45 vs. 34.67 ± 11.79 vs. 32.97 ± 13.70, P < 0.01). TFC was also lower in the combined group compared with the other two groups (22.04 ± 9.94 vs. 28.70 ± 12.82 vs. 31.00 ± 12.69, P < 0.01). Compared with the thrombectomy and thrombolysis groups, the combined group demonstrated a higher EF and a lower LVEDd (56.91 ± 7.96 vs. 52.02 ± 10.85 vs. 53.22 ± 7.39, P < 0.01; 49.89 ± 3.78 vs. 50.51 ± 4.33 vs. 54.11 ± 5.39, P < 0.01). Correlation analysis revealed a significant negative association between IMR and EF (ρ = -0.256, P < 0.01). Additionally, symptom onset-to-balloon time (SOBT) correlated significantly with both IMR and TFC (ρ > 0.2, P < 0.01).

Conclusion: The novel high-burden thrombus criterion provides a precise framework for guiding thrombus management strategies in clinical practice. In STEMI patients with high-burden thrombi after balloon angioplasty, combined thrombectomy/thrombolysis significantly reduces postoperative IMR, improves myocardial perfusion, facilitates left ventricular recovery, and enhances overall prognosis.

新的高负荷血栓标准:取栓加溶栓可改善心肌梗死的微血管阻力。
背景:长期以来,心肌梗死溶栓(TIMI)血栓分级一直被用于评估血栓负荷和指导治疗策略。然而,这种分级系统可能不能完全反映PCI期间血栓处理的复杂性,这在大规模随机试验中对取栓和冠状动脉溶栓的选择和应用造成了潜在的偏差。为了解决这一限制,提出了一种新的高负荷血栓标准,定义为2.0 mm球囊血管成形术后TIMI血栓4-5级。回顾性观察性研究评价高负荷血栓患者联合取栓/溶栓的临床效果,重点关注微循环改善和再灌注。方法:本回顾性观察研究纳入175例急诊PCI的STEMI患者,符合新的高负荷血栓标准。根据术中血栓处理策略将患者分为三组:单独取栓、单独冠状动脉溶栓和联合取栓/溶栓。采用微血管阻力指数(IMR)和TIMI帧数(TFC)评价心肌微循环功能,并分析其与左室射血分数(EF)的相关性。IMR反映微血管阻力,数值越高表明心肌灌注越差。结果:三组患者在基线临床特征、梗死相关动脉、支架植入等方面均无显著差异。取栓/溶栓联合组IMR明显低于取栓组和溶栓组(26.07 ± 12.45 vs. 34.67 ± 11.79 vs. 32.97 ± 13.70,P  0.2,P )结论:新的高负担血栓标准为指导临床血栓管理策略提供了精确的框架。对于球囊血管成形术后高负荷血栓的STEMI患者,联合取栓/溶栓可显著降低术后IMR,改善心肌灌注,促进左室恢复,提高整体预后。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
International journal of cardiology
International journal of cardiology 医学-心血管系统
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
5.70%
发文量
758
审稿时长
44 days
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Cardiology is devoted to cardiology in the broadest sense. Both basic research and clinical papers can be submitted. The journal serves the interest of both practicing clinicians and researchers. In addition to original papers, we are launching a range of new manuscript types, including Consensus and Position Papers, Systematic Reviews, Meta-analyses, and Short communications. Case reports are no longer acceptable. Controversial techniques, issues on health policy and social medicine are discussed and serve as useful tools for encouraging debate.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信