[EARLY RATHER THAN IMMEDIATE PCI IN NSTEMI; IS TIME EQUAL TO MUSCLE ONCE AGAIN?].

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines advocate immediate vs. non-immediate percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) strategy in ST elevation vs. non ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI, NSTEMI). There is however increasing concern that "next-day PCI" in NSTEMI may adversely affect LV systolic and/or diastolic function and a more urgent aggressive approach should be taken in NSTEMI, similar to that in STEMI. In the current study we compared echocardiographic data between patients with STEMI and NSTEMI who had either primary or early PCI respectively.

METHODS

Prospective data of 165 consecutive patients with an acute MI were analyzed. Patients had primary PCI if they had STEMI and non-emergent PCI if they had NSTEMI. Demographic information, laboratory test results, procedure time and post-PCI echocardiographic assessment were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Patients with STEMI were younger compared to patients with NSTEMI. Time to intervention was significantly longer in NSTEMI, reflecting guideline derived intervention strategy (1.9±1.7days, (median 1day) vs. 30±15min, for NSTEMI and STEMI, respectively, p<0.00001). Post-interventional LV systolic ejection fraction was better in NSTEMI compared to STEMI (53±14 vs. 48±13, respectively, p<0.05). Left atrial diameter, mitral inflow parameters and pulmonary arterial pressure were similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Adherence to practice guidelines delaying PCI up to 72 hours in patients with NSTEMI did not adversely affect left ventricular systolic and/or diastolic function compared to immediate PCI in patients with STEMI. Based on current data, we conclude that early PCI intervention rather than an immediate one is appropriate in NSTEMI patients.