PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Marie-Claude Morice

Publications and source records attributed to Marie-Claude Morice.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Cause of death with bare metal and sirolimus-eluting stents.

AIMS: Although drug-eluting stents have assumed a dominant role in interventional cardiology, concern has been raised about the potential for long-term adverse outcomes, including death. The aim of the present study was to compare the incidence and cause of death between patients who received sirolimus-eluting or bare metal stents. METHODS AND RESULTS: An integrated analysis was performed on 1748 patients enrolled in four prospective double-blind trials that randomly assigned patients to receive either a sirolimus-eluting or a bare metal stent for treatment of a single de novo coronary stenosis. During a mean follow-up of 2.6+/-0.6 years, 64 patients (3.7%) died. Total mortality was 3.2% among 870 bare metal stent patients and 4.1% among 878 sirolimus-eluting stent patients (P=0.37); there was no difference in cardiac mortality (1.4 vs. 1.3%; P=0.55) or causes of death between these two groups. The predominant cause of death was non-cardiac. Cardiac death was most frequently assigned owing to unwitnessed death. Death due to acute myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, and stent thrombosis occurred infrequently. CONCLUSION: At a mean follow-up of 2.6 years in percutaneous coronary intervention patients, the predominant cause of death was non-cardiac. There was no significant difference in either the frequency or the cause of death with implantation of either sirolimus-eluting or bare metal stents.

Aged↗
PubMed2006

Is the volume-outcome relation still an issue in the era of PCI with systematic stenting? Results of the greater Paris area PCI registry.

AIMS: In acute myocardial infarction (AMI), primary percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTCA) is the preferred option when it can be performed rapidly. Because of the limited access to high PTCA volume centres in some areas, it has been suggested that PTCA could be performed in low-volume centres on AMI patients. Little data exist on the validity of this strategy in modern era PTCA. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Greater Paris area comprises 11 million inhabitants and accounts for 18% of the French population. In 2001, the hospital agency of the Greater Paris area set up a registry of all PTCAs performed in this region. Data from 2001 and 2002 was analysed. Hospitals performing <400 PTCAs per year were classified as low-volume. A case-control analysis (propensity score) compared in-hospital mortality in low- and high-volume centres. A total of 37 848 angioplasty procedures were performed in 44 centres during the study period; 24.7% were performed in low-volume centres. A non-statistically significant trend towards reduced in-hospital mortality was noted in high-volume centres as opposed to low-volume centres: 2.01 vs. 2.42%, P = 0.057. In-hospital mortality rates were significantly different in the sub-group of emergency procedures: 6.75% in high- vs. 8.54% in low-volume centres, P = 0.028. No difference was noted between low- and high-volume centres in non-emergency procedures (0.62 vs. 0.62%, P = 0.99). CONCLUSION: In the era of modern stenting, a clear inverse relationship exists between hospital PTCA volume and in-hospital mortality after emergency procedures. Tolerance of low-volume thresholds for angioplasty centres with the purpose of providing primary PTCA in AMI should not be recommended, even in underserved areas.

Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronary↗
PubMed2006

Sirolimus- vs paclitaxel-eluting stents in de novo coronary artery lesions: the REALITY trial: a randomized controlled trial.

CONTEXT: Compared with bare metal stents, sirolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting stents have been shown to markedly improve angiographic and clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary revascularization, but their performance in the treatment of de novo coronary lesions has not been compared in a prospective multicenter study. OBJECTIVE: To compare the safety and efficacy of sirolimus-eluting vs paclitaxel-eluting coronary stents. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized comparative trial (the REALITY trial) conducted between August 2003 and February 2004, with angiographic follow-up at 8 months and clinical follow-up at 12 months. SETTING: Ninety hospitals in Europe, Latin America, and Asia. PATIENTS: A total of 1386 patients (mean age, 62.6 years; 73.1% men; 28.0% with diabetes) with angina pectoris and 1 or 2 de novo lesions (2.25-3.00 mm in diameter) in native coronary arteries. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive a sirolimus-eluting stent (n = 701) or a paclitaxel-eluting stent (n = 685). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary end point was in-lesion binary restenosis (presence of a more than 50% luminal-diameter stenosis) at 8 months. Secondary end points included 1-year rates of target lesion and vessel revascularization and a composite end point of cardiac death, Q-wave or non-Q-wave myocardial infarction, coronary artery bypass graft surgery, or repeat target lesion revascularization. RESULTS: In-lesion binary restenosis at 8 months occurred in 86 patients (9.6%) with a sirolimus-eluting stent vs 95 (11.1%) with a paclitaxel-eluting stent (relative risk [RR], 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61-1.17; P = .31). For sirolimus- vs paclitaxel-eluting stents, respectively, the mean (SD) in-stent late loss was 0.09 (0.43) mm vs 0.31 (0.44) mm (difference, -0.22 mm; 95% CI, -0.26 to -0.18 mm; P<.001), mean (SD) in-stent diameter stenosis was 23.1% (16.6%) vs 26.7% (15.8%) (difference, -3.60%; 95% CI, -5.12% to -2.08%; P<.001), and the number of major adverse cardiac events at 1 year was 73 (10.7%) vs 76 (11.4%) (RR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.69-1.27; P = .73). CONCLUSION: In this trial comparing sirolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting coronary stents, there were no differences in the rates of binary restenosis or major adverse cardiac events. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00235092.

Aged↗
PubMed2006

The SYNergy between percutaneous coronary intervention with TAXus and cardiac surgery (SYNTAX) study: design, rationale, and run-in phase.

BACKGROUND: Changes in the treatment of coronary artery disease both surgically and percutaneously have rendered the major randomized trials historical. Furthermore, the restrictive criteria of previous trials excluded most patients treated in daily practice. Although coronary surgery is still considered the current, evidence-based, gold-standard treatment of left main (LM) and 3-vessel coronary disease, the added benefit of drug-eluting stents has further expanded the use of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) beyond less complex populations in daily practice. STUDY DESIGN: The 1500-patient, prospective, multicenter, multinational (European and North American), randomized SYNTAX study with nested registries will enroll "all-comers." Consecutive patients with de novo 3-vessel disease (3VD) and/or LM disease will be screened for eligibility by the Heart Team (composed of an interventionalist, a cardiac surgeon, and the study coordinator) at each site and then allocated to either (1) the randomized cohort, if comparable revascularization can be achieved by either PCI or coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG), or (2) to one of the nested registries for CABG-ineligible patients (PCI registry) or for PCI-ineligible patients (CABG registry). Randomized patients will be stratified based on LM disease and diabetes by site. The primary end point for the randomized comparison is noninferiority of major adverse cardiac and cerebral events between the 2 groups at 1 year. To adequately project the expected enrollment rate per site, a run-in phase was mandated for each site interested in participating in the trial. Both cardiothoracic and interventional cardiology departments within the same institution were asked to complete a questionnaire regarding their frequency of treatment of LM and 3VD over a retrospective 3-month period. IMPLICATIONS: By replacing most traditional inclusion and exclusion criteria with the real-world decision between the cardiothoracic surgeon and the interventionalist, this study will define the roles of CABG and PCI using drug-eluting stents in the contemporary management of LM and 3VD. Results of the run-in phase were used by the steering committee to determine eligibility and to project enrollment for each site.

Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronary↗
PubMed2005

Nine-month outcome of patients treated by percutaneous coronary interventions for bifurcation lesions in the recent era: a report from the Prevention of Restenosis with Tranilast and its Outcomes (PRESTO) trial.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this research was to determine the influence of bifurcation lesions on the outcome of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the recent era. BACKGROUND: The treatment of bifurcation lesions by PCI has been associated with an increased complication rate. Whether recent improvements of interventional practice have translated into improved outcomes in this patient subgroup is unknown. METHODS: The 11,482 patients enrolled in the Prevention of Restenosis with Tranilast and its Outcomes (PRESTO) were stratified according to the presence (n = 1,412) or absence (n = 10,068) of at least one bifurcation lesion treated by PCI. Baseline characteristics and outcome of patients undergoing PCI for bifurcation lesions were compared to those of patients treated for nonbifurcation lesions. RESULTS: Patients treated for bifurcation lesions were less likely to have prior myocardial infarction (MI), prior coronary artery bypass graft surgery, and had a higher proportion of current stable angina (p < 0.01 for all comparisons). Bifurcation lesions involved more frequently the left anterior descending coronary artery and were more complex (angulated, eccentric, ostial, and tortuous) than nonbifurcation lesions. Percutaneous coronary intervention of bifurcation lesions was characterized by less frequent stent implantation (71% vs. 80%); PCI of bifurcation lesions was associated with an increased rate of combined end point death/MI/target vessel revascularization (TVR) at nine months (18% vs. 15%, p = 0.002) because of increased rates of TVR (17% vs. 14%, p < 0.001), whereas death (1%) and MI (1%) were not different between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Percutaneous coronary intervention of bifurcation lesions is associated with higher TVR at follow-up. However, the risk of death, MI, death/MI was similar in patients treated for bifurcation or nonbifurcation lesions.

Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronary↗
PubMed2005

Maintenance of long-term clinical benefit with sirolimus-eluting coronary stents: three-year results of the RAVEL trial.

BACKGROUND: The use of sirolimus-eluting coronary stents has been associated with a nearly complete elimination of restenosis at 6 months and with a very low 1-year incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE). This analysis examined whether these beneficial effects persist over the longer term. METHODS AND RESULTS: This multicenter trial randomly assigned 238 patients to revascularization of single, de novo, native coronary artery lesions with sirolimus-eluting versus conventional bare-metal stents. Survival free from target lesion revascularization (TLR), target vessel failure (TVF), and MACE up to 3 years of follow-up was compared between the 2 treatment groups. Complete data sets were available in 94.2% of patients treated with sirolimus-eluting stents and in 94.1% of patients randomized to the control group. The cumulative 1-, 2-, and 3-year event-free survival rates were 99.2%, 96.5%, and 93.7% for TLR and 95.8%, 92.3%, and 87.9% for TVF, respectively, in the sirolimus-eluting stent group, versus 75.9%, 75.9%, and 75.0% for TLR and 71.2%, 69.4%, and 67.3% for TVF in the control group (P<0.001 for both comparisons at 3 years). Rates of MACE at 3 years were 15.8% in patients randomly assigned to sirolimus-eluting stents versus 33.1% in patients assigned to bare-metal stents (P=0.002). One patient treated with a sirolimus-eluting stent died of a cardiac cause between 12 and 36 months. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of de novo coronary stenosis with sirolimus-eluting stents was associated with a sustained clinical benefit and very low rates of TLR and of other MACE up to 3 years after device implantation.

Coronary Restenosis↗
PubMed2004

Cutting balloon versus conventional balloon angioplasty for the treatment of in-stent restenosis: results of the restenosis cutting balloon evaluation trial (RESCUT).

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this trial was to compare cutting balloon angioplasty (CBA) with conventional balloon angioplasty (i.e., percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty [PTCA]) for the treatment of patients with coronary in-stent restenosis (ISR). BACKGROUND: Retrospective studies suggest CBA might be superior to conventional PTCA in the treatment of ISR. METHODS: The Restenosis Cutting Balloon Evaluation Trial (RESCUT) is a multicenter, randomized, prospective European trial including 428 patients with all types of ISR (e.g., focal, multifocal, diffuse, proliferative). RESULTS: In both groups, the majority of ISR lesions were shorter than 20 mm. The length of restenotic stents was similar (CBA: 18.6 +/- 9.7 mm; PTCA: 18.3 +/- 8.7 mm). The number of balloons used to treat ISR was lower in the CBA group: only one balloon was used in 82.3% of CBA cases, compared with 75% of PTCA procedures (p = 0.03). Balloon slippage was less frequent in the CBA group (CBA 6.5%, PTCA 25%; p < 0.01). There was a trend toward a lower need for additional stenting in the CBA group (CBA 3.9%, PTCA 8.0%; p = 0.07). At seven-month angiographic follow-up, the binary restenosis rate was not different between the groups (CBA 29.8%, PTCA 31.4%; p = 0.82), with a similar pattern of recurrent restenosis. Clinical events at seven months were also similar. CONCLUSIONS: Cutting balloon angioplasty did not reduce recurrent ISR and major adverse cardiac events, as compared with conventional PTCA. However, CBA was associated with some procedural advantages, such as use of fewer balloons, less requirement for additional stenting, and a lower incidence of balloon slippage.

Angioplasty, Balloon↗
PubMed2004

The NUGGET study: NIR ultra gold-gilded equivalency trial.

This study should clarify whether the gold-coated NIROYAL stent is equivalent to the stainless steel NIR stent. Patients were randomized to either NIR stent (n = 298) or a NIROYAL stent (n = 305). The primary endpoint was the minimum lumen diameter of the target lesion at 6 months postprocedure. Secondary endpoints focused on clinical events. At 30 days, adverse events were similar in both groups. At 6 months, the minimal lumen diameter was 1.83/1.64 mm (P < 0.001; 95% CI = 0.08-0.30) and the angiographic restenosis rate was 20.6%/37.7% (P < 0.001; 95% CI = -24.7 to -9.3) for NIR/NIROYAL. The 6-month MACE rates were NIR 7.4% and NIROYAL 10.5% (95% CI = -7.7 to 1.4). Compared to stainless steel stent, the NIROYAL stent demonstrated a smaller minimal lumen diameter, a higher late loss (i.e., higher neointimal hyperplasia in spite of a significantly better initial gain), with higher restenosis and similar MACE rates at 6 months.

Aged↗
PubMed2004

Sirolimus-eluting stents inhibit neointimal hyperplasia in diabetic patients. Insights from the RAVEL Trial.

Patients with diabetes mellitus have less favourable outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) than non-diabetics. We performed a subgroup analysis of the multicentre RAVEL trial to examine the impact of the sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) on outcomes in diabetic patients. The RAVEL study randomized 238 patients to treatment with either sirolimus-eluting or bare metal stents. Forty-four patients were diabetic; 19 received sirolimus-eluting stents and 25 were treated with bare metal stents. The differences in outcomes between diabetic and non-diabetic patients treated with SES (n=101) were also assessed. Follow-up angiography was performed at 6 months. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) defined as death, myocardial infarction (MI), or target lesion revascularization (TLR) were analysed at 12-month follow-up. Six-month in-stent late lumen loss was significantly lower for the diabetic SES than the bare stent group (0.07+/-0.2 vs 0.82+/-0.5mm; P<0.001) and similar to that in non-diabetics treated with SES (-0.03+/-0.27mm). There was zero restenosis in the SES groups (diabetic and non-diabetic) compared to a 42% rate in the diabetic population assigned to bare metal stents (P=0.001). After 12 months, there was one non-Q-wave MI and one non-cardiac death in the diabetic SES group, while 12 patients in the bare metal stent group had MACE (one death, two MI, nine TLR) (P=0.01)-an event-free survival rate of 90% vs 52%, respectively (P<0.01). There were no TLRs in both SES groups compared to 36% rate in the diabetic bare metal stent group (P=0.007). Conclusion Diabetics treated with SES were associated with a virtual abolition of neointimal proliferation and low event rates at long-term follow-up.

Coronary Restenosis↗
PubMed2004

Comparison of 5 French versus 6 French guiding catheters for transradial coronary intervention: a prospective, randomized study.

We compared 5 versus 6 French (Fr) guiding catheters in coronary intervention using the transradial approach. Smaller guiding catheters may have advantages over larger ones in transradial coronary intervention. However, there is uncertainty about how small is small enough, and when smaller would become too small. Eligible patients were randomized between the 5 and 6 Fr groups before the procedure. The primary endpoint was procedural success. A total of 216 patients were randomized. Procedural success was obtained in 95% of the 6 Fr group versus 90% of the 5 Fr group (p = 0.25). Most of the failures in the 5 Fr group were because of cross-over to the 6 Fr group. Crossover to the 5 Fr group occurred in 1 patient in the 6 Fr group (0.9%; p = 0.05) because of a small radial artery. Transradial intervention using 5 Fr guiding catheters necessitates crossover to a 6 Fr catheter in 6.8% of cases, and offers no clear advantages over the 6 Fr technique.

Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronary↗
PubMed2003

Long-term follow-up of incomplete stent apposition in patients who received sirolimus-eluting stent for de novo coronary lesions: an intravascular ultrasound analysis.

BACKGROUND: Incomplete stent apposition (ISA) has been previously documented after sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) implantation. The aim of this study was to investigate the long-term intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) findings of ISA in patients who received SES. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 13 patients who received SES and showed ISA at follow-up IVUS (follow-up I) were investigated. IVUS was performed on all of these patients 12 months later (follow-up II). Quantitative ISA area measurement was also performed at follow-up I and II. No vascular remodeling was observed in the vessel segment with ISA; external elastic membrane area was 19.4+/-6.6 versus 19.5+/-6.4 mm2 at follow-up I and II, respectively. There was also no significant change in external elastic membrane area between vessel segment with ISA and without ISA (+1.5% versus -3.0%, respectively; P=0.27) at late follow-up. The ISA area, either including (2.5+/-1.7 versus 3.8+/-6.3 mm2; P=NS) or excluding (2.5+/-1.8 versus 2.4+/-1.7 mm2; P=NS) a single patient with aneurysm formation, was not significantly different between follow-up I and II. One patient manifested a coronary aneurysm in the stented segment at late follow-up that was probably present at the initial follow-up but masked by thrombus. It was successfully treated with a covered stent. All patients were asymptomatic, and no patient experienced late thrombotic occlusion. CONCLUSIONS: Vessel dimensions and area of ISA did not change over time, except for 1 coronary aneurysm that became apparent. ISA after implantation of a SES was not associated with adverse events at late follow-up.

Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation↗
PubMed2003

Direct stent implantation using the EXPRESS Coronary Stent System: results of a multi-center feasibility study.

The aim of this prospective, multicenter, single arm study was to assess the safety and feasibility of EXPRESS Coronary Stent implantation in native coronary arteries without balloon predilatation. Forty-two patients with de novo or restenotic lesions were enrolled, of which 38 were eligible for analysis. The coronary lesions were predominantly complex, occurring in arteries with a mean reference diameter of 2.80 +/- 0.49 mm. Technical and procedural success were achieved in 89.5% and 84% of the cases respectively. The mean minimal lumen diameter increased from 1.08 +/- 0.26 mm to 2.55 +/- 0.44 mm and diameter stenosis decreased from 61 +/- 7% to 13 +/- 8%. The primary endpoint of major adverse cardiac events at 30 days was 2.6% and was limited to only one event (target vessel revascularization, nontarget lesion). No other MACE were observed during the three-month follow-up period. Based on the findings of this study, direct stenting with the EXPRESS Stent appears feasible and is well tolerated.

Aged↗
PubMed2002

Intravascular ultrasound findings in the multicenter, randomized, double-blind RAVEL (RAndomized study with the sirolimus-eluting VElocity balloon-expandable stent in the treatment of patients with de novo native coronary artery Lesions) trial.

BACKGROUND: The goal of this intravascular ultrasound investigation was to provide a more detailed morphological analysis of the local biological effects of the implantation of a sirolimus-eluting stent compared with an uncoated stent. METHODS AND RESULTS: In the RAVEL trial, 238 patients with single de novo lesions were randomized to receive either an 18-mm sirolimus-eluting stent (Bx VELOCITY stent, Cordis) or an uncoated stent (Bx VELOCITY stent). In a subset of 95 patients (sirolimus-eluting stent=48, uncoated stent=47), motorized intravascular ultrasound pullback (0.5 mm/s) was performed at a 6-month follow-up. Stent volumes, total vessel volumes, and plaque-behind-stent volumes were comparable. However, the difference in neointimal hyperplasia (2+/-5 versus 37+/-28 mm3) and percent of volume obstruction (1+/-3% versus 29+/-20%) at 6 months between the 2 groups was highly significant (P<0.001), emphasizing the nearly complete abolition of the proliferative process inside the drug-eluting stent. Analysis of the proximal and distal edge volumes showed no significant difference between the 2 groups in external elastic membrane or lumen and plaque volume at the proximal and distal edges. There was also no evidence of intrastent thrombosis or persisting dissection at the stent edges. Although there was a higher incidence of incomplete stent apposition in the sirolimus group compared with the uncoated stent group (P<0.05), it was not associated with any adverse clinical events at 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: Sirolimus-eluting stents are effective in preventing neointimal hyperplasia without creating edge effect and without affecting the plaque burden behind the struts.

Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation↗
PubMed2002

A randomized comparison of a sirolimus-eluting stent with a standard stent for coronary revascularization.

BACKGROUND: The need for repeated treatment of restenosis of a treated vessel remains the main limitation of percutaneous coronary revascularization. Because sirolimus (rapamycin) inhibits the proliferation of lymphocytes and smooth-muscle cells, we compared a sirolimus-eluting stent with a standard uncoated stent in patients with angina pectoris. METHODS: We performed a randomized, double-blind trial to compare the two types of stents for revascularization of single, primary lesions in native coronary arteries. The trial included 238 patients at 19 medical centers. The primary end point was in-stent late luminal loss (the difference between the minimal luminal diameter immediately after the procedure and the diameter at six months). Secondary end points included the percentage of in-stent stenosis of the luminal diameter and the rate of restenosis (luminal narrowing of 50 percent or more). We also analyzed a composite clinical end point consisting of death, myocardial infarction, and percutaneous or surgical revascularization at 1, 6, and 12 months. RESULTS: At six months, the degree of neointimal proliferation, manifested as the mean (+/-SD) late luminal loss, was significantly lower in the sirolimus-stent group (-0.01+/-0.33 mm) than in the standard-stent group (0.80+/-0.53 mm, P<0.001). None of the patients in the sirolimus-stent group, as compared with 26.6 percent of those in the standard-stent group, had restenosis of 50 percent or more of the luminal diameter (P<0.001). There were no episodes of stent thrombosis. During a follow-up period of up to one year, the overall rate of major cardiac events was 5.8 percent in the sirolimus-stent group and 28.8 percent in the standard-stent group (P<0.001). The difference was due entirely to a higher rate of revascularization of the target vessel in the standard-stent group. CONCLUSIONS: As compared with a standard coronary stent, a sirolimus-eluting stent shows considerable promise for the prevention of neointimal proliferation, restenosis, and associated clinical events.

Coronary Disease↗
PubMed2002

A randomized comparison of direct stenting with conventional stent implantation in selected patients with acute myocardial infarction.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine whether direct stenting might prevent the adverse events associated with stent implantation during primary angioplasty and to compare it with conventional stent implantation in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). BACKGROUND: No trial has demonstrated that stents favorably influence mortality rate. Recent studies have even suggested a negative impact of stents on coronary blood flow and clinical outcome. METHODS: Of 409 patients treated by primary angioplasty with stent implantation in our center, 206 (50%) were enrolled in this randomized, single-center trial and allocated to direct stent implantation (n = 102) or stent implantation after balloon pre-dilation (n = 104). The study end points included angiographic results (final corrected Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction [TIMI] frame count and a composite end point of slow and no-reflow or distal embolization), an electrocardiogram marker of myocardial reperfusion assessment (ST-segment resolution) and in-hospital clinical outcome (death and recurrent infarction). RESULTS: Direct stent implantation failed in eight patients but succeeded after pre-dilation in all. A non-significant increase in TIMI flow grade 3 was achieved after direct stenting (95.1% vs. 93.3%, p = 0.74) without significant difference in the corrected TIMI frame count (31.5 +/- 17 and 35.2 +/- 20 frames after direct and conventional stent, respectively, p = 0.42). The composite angiographic end point was significantly reduced by direct stent implantation (11.7% vs. 26.9%, p = 0.01). ST-segment resolution was also significantly improved after direct stent (no ST-segment resolution in 20.2% vs. 38.1% after direct and conventional stent, respectively, p = 0.01). Death and/or recurrent infarction occurred in six patients after conventional stent implantation and in two patients after direct stenting (p = 0.28). CONCLUSIONS: In selected patients with AMI, direct stenting can be applied safely and effectively. This strategy may result in a significant reduction of microvascular injury, as suggested by improved ST-segment resolution after reperfusion with major potential clinical consequences.

Aged↗