Deferred vs immediate stenting in ST elevation myocardial infarction: Potential interest in selected patients.

Summary Background Slow flow, no reflow and distal embolization often occur during primary angioplasty in ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), compromising optimal myocardial reperfusion. Aims This study aimed at assessing the impact of deferred stenting (DS) on periprocedural events as compared to immediate stenting (IS). The second objective was to gather the reasons advocated by the physicians for deferring stenting. Methods All consecutive patients referred for primary angioplasty were included between September 2010 and November 2011. Physicians were free to choose the strategy between DS and IS but had to justify their choice. DS patients underwent a coronary angiogram control in a delay > 24 h. Results Ninety-eight patients were included. Forty patients underwent DS and 58 IS. DS strategy involved thrombus management by thromboaspiration (33 patients 82.5%) and by the use of AntiGpIIbIIIa (23 patients 62.2%). This strategy could be achieved with a low complication rate. In particular, one patient had a reocclusion leading to a rapid reintervention and one had a distal embolization. In comparison, 11 periprocedural events occurred in the IS subgroup. In addition, among DS patients, 7 were treated medically because of a non-significant stenosis. The major criteria considered by the operator to prefer DS in the presence of a TIMI 3 flow concerned thrombotic load. Conclusion This mono-centric experience confirmed the feasibility and the safety of DS. On top of reducing periprocedural events, it may allow for other treatment options in selected STEMI patients, e.g. surgery or medical treatment. The reasons leading physicians to choose DS were large thrombus burden on top of resolution of chest pain and normalization of the ECG. These criteria could help selecting situations in which DS may be of particular value as compared to IS.