冠状动脉内注射肾上腺素治疗经皮冠状动脉介入治疗后无血流现象的有效性和安全性:一项系统回顾研究。

IF 2.6 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Elmira Jafari Afshar, Parham Samimisedeh, Amirhossein Tayebi, Neda Shafiabadi Hassani, Hadith Rastad, Shahrooz Yazdani
{"title":"冠状动脉内注射肾上腺素治疗经皮冠状动脉介入治疗后无血流现象的有效性和安全性:一项系统回顾研究。","authors":"Elmira Jafari Afshar,&nbsp;Parham Samimisedeh,&nbsp;Amirhossein Tayebi,&nbsp;Neda Shafiabadi Hassani,&nbsp;Hadith Rastad,&nbsp;Shahrooz Yazdani","doi":"10.1177/17539447231154654","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Currently, no pharmacological or device-based intervention has been fully proven to reverse the no-reflow phenomenon.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To assess the efficacy and safety of intracoronary (IC) epinephrine in the management of no-reflow phenomenon following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), either as first-line treatment or after the failure of conventional agents.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Systematic review.</p><p><strong>Data sources and methods: </strong>PubMed and Scopus databases were systematically searched up to 28 May 2022, with additional manual search on the Google Scholar and review of the reference lists of the relevant studies to identify all published studies. Cohort studies, case series, and interventional studies written in English which evaluated the efficacy and safety of IC epinephrine in patients with no-flow phenomenon were included in our review.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Six of the 646 articles identified in the initial search met our inclusion criteria. IC epinephrine was used either as a first-line treatment [two randomized clinical trials (RCTs)] or after the failure of conventional agents (two cohort studies and two case series) for restoring the coronary flow, mainly after primary PCI. As first-line therapy, IC epinephrine successfully restored coronary flow in over 90% of patients in both RCTs, which significantly outperformed IC adenosine (78%) but lagged behind combination of verapamil and tirofiban (100%) in this regard. In the refractory no-flow phenomenon, successful reperfusion [thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow grade = 3] was achieved in three out of four patients after the administration of IC epinephrine based on the results from both case series. Their findings were confirmed by a recent cohort study that further compared IC epinephrine with IC adenosine and found significant differences between them in terms of efficacy [% TIMI flow grade 3: (69.1% <i>versus</i> 52.7%, respectively; <i>p</i> value = 0.04)] and 1-year major adverse cardiac event (MACE) outcomes (11.3% <i>versus</i> 26.7%, respectively; <i>p</i> value ⩽ 0.01). Overall, malignant ventricular arrhythmias were reported in none of the patients treated with IC epinephrine.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Results from available evidence suggest that IC epinephrine might be an effective and safe agent in managing the no-reflow phenomenon.</p>","PeriodicalId":23035,"journal":{"name":"Therapeutic Advances in Cardiovascular Disease","volume":"17 ","pages":"17539447231154654"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/32/7a/10.1177_17539447231154654.PMC10071100.pdf","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy and safety of intracoronary epinephrine for the management of the no-reflow phenomenon following percutaneous coronary interventions: a systematic-review study.\",\"authors\":\"Elmira Jafari Afshar,&nbsp;Parham Samimisedeh,&nbsp;Amirhossein Tayebi,&nbsp;Neda Shafiabadi Hassani,&nbsp;Hadith Rastad,&nbsp;Shahrooz Yazdani\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/17539447231154654\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Currently, no pharmacological or device-based intervention has been fully proven to reverse the no-reflow phenomenon.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To assess the efficacy and safety of intracoronary (IC) epinephrine in the management of no-reflow phenomenon following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), either as first-line treatment or after the failure of conventional agents.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Systematic review.</p><p><strong>Data sources and methods: </strong>PubMed and Scopus databases were systematically searched up to 28 May 2022, with additional manual search on the Google Scholar and review of the reference lists of the relevant studies to identify all published studies. Cohort studies, case series, and interventional studies written in English which evaluated the efficacy and safety of IC epinephrine in patients with no-flow phenomenon were included in our review.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Six of the 646 articles identified in the initial search met our inclusion criteria. IC epinephrine was used either as a first-line treatment [two randomized clinical trials (RCTs)] or after the failure of conventional agents (two cohort studies and two case series) for restoring the coronary flow, mainly after primary PCI. As first-line therapy, IC epinephrine successfully restored coronary flow in over 90% of patients in both RCTs, which significantly outperformed IC adenosine (78%) but lagged behind combination of verapamil and tirofiban (100%) in this regard. In the refractory no-flow phenomenon, successful reperfusion [thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow grade = 3] was achieved in three out of four patients after the administration of IC epinephrine based on the results from both case series. Their findings were confirmed by a recent cohort study that further compared IC epinephrine with IC adenosine and found significant differences between them in terms of efficacy [% TIMI flow grade 3: (69.1% <i>versus</i> 52.7%, respectively; <i>p</i> value = 0.04)] and 1-year major adverse cardiac event (MACE) outcomes (11.3% <i>versus</i> 26.7%, respectively; <i>p</i> value ⩽ 0.01). Overall, malignant ventricular arrhythmias were reported in none of the patients treated with IC epinephrine.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Results from available evidence suggest that IC epinephrine might be an effective and safe agent in managing the no-reflow phenomenon.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23035,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Therapeutic Advances in Cardiovascular Disease\",\"volume\":\"17 \",\"pages\":\"17539447231154654\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/32/7a/10.1177_17539447231154654.PMC10071100.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Therapeutic Advances in Cardiovascular Disease\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/17539447231154654\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Therapeutic Advances in Cardiovascular Disease","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17539447231154654","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

背景:目前,没有药物或器械干预被充分证明可以逆转无血流现象。目的:评价冠状动脉内(IC)肾上腺素在经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)后治疗无血流现象的有效性和安全性,无论是作为一线治疗还是在常规药物治疗失败后。设计:系统回顾。数据来源和方法:系统检索PubMed和Scopus数据库至2022年5月28日,并在Google Scholar上进行额外的人工检索,并审查相关研究的参考文献列表,以确定所有已发表的研究。我们的综述包括了用英文撰写的队列研究、病例系列和介入研究,这些研究评估了IC肾上腺素对无血流现象患者的疗效和安全性。结果:在最初的检索中确定的646篇文章中有6篇符合我们的纳入标准。IC肾上腺素被用作一线治疗[两项随机临床试验(RCTs)],或在常规药物(两项队列研究和两例病例系列研究)失败后用于恢复冠状动脉血流,主要是在首次PCI后。在两项随机对照试验中,作为一线治疗,IC肾上腺素在90%以上的患者中成功恢复冠状动脉血流,显著优于IC腺苷(78%),但在这方面落后于异拉帕米和替罗非班的联合治疗(100%)。在难治性无血流现象中,根据两个病例系列的结果,4例患者中有3例在给予IC肾上腺素后实现了再灌注成功[心肌梗死溶栓(TIMI)血流等级= 3]。最近的一项队列研究证实了他们的发现,该研究进一步比较了IC肾上腺素和IC腺苷,发现两者在疗效方面存在显著差异[% TIMI流量3级:分别为69.1%和52.7%;p值= 0.04)]和1年主要不良心脏事件(MACE)结局(分别为11.3%和26.7%;P值< 0.01)。总的来说,在使用IC肾上腺素治疗的患者中没有恶性室性心律失常的报道。结论:现有证据表明,IC肾上腺素可能是治疗无血流现象的有效和安全的药物。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Efficacy and safety of intracoronary epinephrine for the management of the no-reflow phenomenon following percutaneous coronary interventions: a systematic-review study.

Efficacy and safety of intracoronary epinephrine for the management of the no-reflow phenomenon following percutaneous coronary interventions: a systematic-review study.

Efficacy and safety of intracoronary epinephrine for the management of the no-reflow phenomenon following percutaneous coronary interventions: a systematic-review study.

Efficacy and safety of intracoronary epinephrine for the management of the no-reflow phenomenon following percutaneous coronary interventions: a systematic-review study.

Background: Currently, no pharmacological or device-based intervention has been fully proven to reverse the no-reflow phenomenon.

Objectives: To assess the efficacy and safety of intracoronary (IC) epinephrine in the management of no-reflow phenomenon following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), either as first-line treatment or after the failure of conventional agents.

Design: Systematic review.

Data sources and methods: PubMed and Scopus databases were systematically searched up to 28 May 2022, with additional manual search on the Google Scholar and review of the reference lists of the relevant studies to identify all published studies. Cohort studies, case series, and interventional studies written in English which evaluated the efficacy and safety of IC epinephrine in patients with no-flow phenomenon were included in our review.

Results: Six of the 646 articles identified in the initial search met our inclusion criteria. IC epinephrine was used either as a first-line treatment [two randomized clinical trials (RCTs)] or after the failure of conventional agents (two cohort studies and two case series) for restoring the coronary flow, mainly after primary PCI. As first-line therapy, IC epinephrine successfully restored coronary flow in over 90% of patients in both RCTs, which significantly outperformed IC adenosine (78%) but lagged behind combination of verapamil and tirofiban (100%) in this regard. In the refractory no-flow phenomenon, successful reperfusion [thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow grade = 3] was achieved in three out of four patients after the administration of IC epinephrine based on the results from both case series. Their findings were confirmed by a recent cohort study that further compared IC epinephrine with IC adenosine and found significant differences between them in terms of efficacy [% TIMI flow grade 3: (69.1% versus 52.7%, respectively; p value = 0.04)] and 1-year major adverse cardiac event (MACE) outcomes (11.3% versus 26.7%, respectively; p value ⩽ 0.01). Overall, malignant ventricular arrhythmias were reported in none of the patients treated with IC epinephrine.

Conclusion: Results from available evidence suggest that IC epinephrine might be an effective and safe agent in managing the no-reflow phenomenon.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Therapeutic Advances in Cardiovascular Disease
Therapeutic Advances in Cardiovascular Disease CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
审稿时长
9 weeks
期刊介绍: The journal is aimed at clinicians and researchers from the cardiovascular disease field and will be a forum for all views and reviews relating to this discipline.Topics covered will include: ·arteriosclerosis ·cardiomyopathies ·coronary artery disease ·diabetes ·heart failure ·hypertension ·metabolic syndrome ·obesity ·peripheral arterial disease ·stroke ·arrhythmias ·genetics
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信