Home > DARE Reviews > Adjunctive mechanical devices to prevent...
  • We are sorry, but NCBI web applications do not support your browser and may not function properly. More information

PubMed Health. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE): Quality-assessed Reviews [Internet]. York (UK): Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (UK); 1995-.

Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE): Quality-assessed Reviews.

Adjunctive mechanical devices to prevent distal embolization in patients undergoing mechanical revascularization for acute myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis of randomized trials

Review published: 2007.

Bibliographic details: De Luca G, Suryapranata H, Stone G W, Antoniucci D, Neumann F J, Chiariello M.  Adjunctive mechanical devices to prevent distal embolization in patients undergoing mechanical revascularization for acute myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. American Heart Journal 2007; 153(3): 343-353. [PubMed: 17307410]

Quality assessment

This review found that adjunctive mechanical devices are safe and associated with better perfusion and decreased embolisation in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Although these conclusions are likely to be reliable, they should be interpreted with some degree of caution as the validity of the primary studies was not assessed and details of the control interventions were not reported. Full critical summary

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The benefits of adjunctive mechanical devices to prevent distal embolization in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) are still a matter of debate. The aim of this meta-analysis was to combine data from all randomized trials conducted with adjunctive mechanical devices to prevent distal embolization in AMI.

METHODS: The literature was scanned by formal searches of electronic databases (MEDLINE and Central) from January 1990 to October 2006, scientific session abstracts (from January 1990 to October 2006), and oral presentation and/or expert slide presentations (from January 2002 to October 2006) (on the Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics, American Heart Association, European Society of Cardiology, American College of Cardiology, and European Percutaneous Revascularization Web sites). We examined all randomized trials on adjunctive mechanical devices to prevent distal embolization in AMI. The following key words were used: randomized trial, myocardial infarction, reperfusion, primary angioplasty, rescue angioplasty, thrombectomy, thrombus aspiration, proximal or distal protection device, X-sizer, Diver, Export Catheter, Angiojet, Rescue catheter, Pronto catheter, PercuSurge, GuardWire, FilterWire, and SpideRX. Disagreements were resolved by consensus.

RESULTS: A total of 21 trials with 3721 patients were included (1877 patients [50.4%] in the adjunctive mechanical device group and 1844 [49.6%] in the control group); 1502 patients (40.3%) were randomized in trials with distal protection devices, and 2219 patients (59.7%) were randomized in trials with thrombectomy devices. Adjunctive mechanical devices were associated with a higher rate of postprocedural TIMI 3 flow (89.4% vs 87.1%, P = .03), a significantly higher rate of postprocedural myocardial blush grade 3 (48.8% vs 36.5%, P < .0001), and less distal embolization (6.0% vs 9.3%, P = .008), without any benefit in terms of 30-day mortality (2.5% vs 2.6%, P = .88). No difference was observed in terms of coronary perforations (0.27% vs 0.07%, P = .24).

CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis demonstrates that, among patients with AMI treated with percutaneous coronary intervention, the use of adjunctive mechanical devices to prevent distal embolization is associated with better myocardial perfusion and less distal embolization, but without an apparent improvement in survival.

CRD has determined that this article meets the DARE scientific quality criteria for a systematic review.

Copyright © 2013 University of York.

PubMed Health Blog...

read all...

Recent Activity

    Your browsing activity is empty.

    Activity recording is turned off.

    Turn recording back on

    See more...