COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
MULTICENTER STUDY
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL

Comparison of Immediate With Delayed Stenting Using the Minimalist Immediate Mechanical Intervention Approach in Acute ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: The MIMI Study

Loic Belle, Pascal Motreff, Lionel Mangin, Grégoire Rangé, Xavier Marcaggi, Antoine Marie, Nadine Ferrier, Olivier Dubreuil, Gilles Zemour, Géraud Souteyrand, Christophe Caussin, Nicolas Amabile, Karl Isaaz, Raphael Dauphin, René Koning, Christophe Robin, Benjamin Faurie, Laurent Bonello, Stanislas Champin, Cédric Delhaye, François Cuilleret, Nathan Mewton, Céline Genty, Magalie Viallon, Jean Luc Bosson, Pierre Croisille
Circulation. Cardiovascular Interventions 2016, 9 (3): e003388
26957418

BACKGROUND: Delayed stent implantation after restoration of normal epicardial flow by a minimalist immediate mechanical intervention aims to decrease the rate of distal embolization and impaired myocardial reperfusion after percutaneous coronary intervention. We sought to confirm whether a delayed stenting (DS) approach (24-48 hours) improves myocardial reperfusion, versus immediate stenting, in patients with acute ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention.

METHODS AND RESULTS: In the prospective, randomized, open-label minimalist immediate mechanical intervention (MIMI) trial, patients (n=140) with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction ≤12 hours were randomized to immediate stenting (n=73) or DS (n=67) after Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction 3 flow restoration by thrombus aspiration. Patients in the DS group underwent a second coronary arteriography for stent implantation a median of 36 hours (interquartile range 29-46) after randomization. The primary end point was microvascular obstruction (% left ventricular mass) on cardiac magnetic resonance imaging performed 5 days (interquartile range 4-6) after the first procedure. There was a nonsignificant trend toward lower microvascular obstruction in the immediate stenting group compared with DS group (1.88% versus 3.96%; P=0.051), which became significant after adjustment for the area at risk (P=0.049). Median infarct weight, left ventricular ejection fraction, and infarct size did not differ between groups. No difference in 6-month outcomes was apparent for the rate of major cardiovascular and cerebral events.

CONCLUSIONS: The present findings do not support a strategy of DS versus immediate stenting in patients with ST-segment-elevation infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention and even suggested a deleterious effect of DS on microvascular obstruction size.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01360242.

Full Text Links

Find Full Text Links for this Article

Discussion

You are not logged in. Sign Up or Log In to join the discussion.

Related Papers

Remove bar
Read by QxMD icon Read
26957418
×

Save your favorite articles in one place with a free QxMD account.

×

Search Tips

Use Boolean operators: AND/OR

diabetic AND foot
diabetes OR diabetic

Exclude a word using the 'minus' sign

Virchow -triad

Use Parentheses

water AND (cup OR glass)

Add an asterisk (*) at end of a word to include word stems

Neuro* will search for Neurology, Neuroscientist, Neurological, and so on

Use quotes to search for an exact phrase

"primary prevention of cancer"
(heart or cardiac or cardio*) AND arrest -"American Heart Association"