Sandeep Arunothayaraj; Miles W. Behan; Thierry Lefèvre; Jens F. Lassen; Alaide Chieffo; Goran Stankovic; Francesco Burzotta; Manuel Pan; Miroslaw Ferenc; Thomas Hovasse; Mark S. Spence; Philippe Brunel; James M. Cotton; James Cockburn; Didier Carrié; Andreas Baumbach; Michael Maeng; Yves Louvard; David Hildick-Smith.
DOI: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.123.013675
Abstract
Background
Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) has improved clinical outcomes in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction. However, as many as 50% of patients still have suboptimal myocardial reperfusion and experience extensive myocardial necrosis. The PiCSO-AMI-I trial (Pressure-Controlled Intermittent Coronary Sinus Occlusion-Acute Myocardial Infarction-I) evaluated whether PiCSO therapy can further reduce myocardial infarct size (IS) in patients undergoing pPCI.
Methods
Patients with anterior ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction and Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction flow 0-1 were randomized at 16 European centers to PiCSO-assisted pPCI or conventional pPCI. The PiCSO Impulse Catheter (8Fr balloon-tipped catheter) was inserted via femoral venous access after antegrade flow restoration of the culprit vessel and before proceeding with stenting. The primary end point was the difference in IS (expressed as a percentage of left ventricular mass) at 5 days by cardiac magnetic resonance. Secondary end points were the extent of microvascular obstruction and intramyocardial hemorrhage at 5 days and IS at 6 months.
Results
Among 145 randomized patients, 72 received PiCSO-assisted pPCI and 73 conventional pPCI. No differences were observed in IS at 5 days (27.2%±12.4% versus 28.3%±11.45%; P=0.59) and 6 months (19.2%±10.1% versus 18.8%±7.7%; P=0.83), nor were differences between PiCSO-treated and control patients noted in terms of the occurrence of microvascular obstruction (67.2% versus 64.6%; P=0.85) or intramyocardial hemorrhage (55.7% versus 60%; P=0.72). The study was prematurely discontinued by the sponsor with no further clinical follow-up beyond 6 months. However, up to 6 months of PiCSO use appeared safe with no device-related adverse events.
Conclusions
In this prematurely discontinued randomized trial, PiCSO therapy as an adjunct to pPCI did not reduce IS when compared with conventional pPCI in patients with anterior ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction. PiCSO use was associated with increased procedural time and contrast but no increase in adverse events up to 6 months.
ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03625869.
