In-Hospital Outcomes on Patients Submitted to Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Rescue

ABSTRACT Background Difficulties to reach centers that offer primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in a timely manner turn intravenous thrombolysis into the predominant reperfusion mode in patients with ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in Brazil. In this scenario, rescue PCI becomes an important therapeutic option for patients who fail reperfusion. We have compared hospital outcomes of these two PCI modalities in STEMI. Methods Between August 2006 to October 2012, consecutive patients with STEMI enrolled in the Angiocardio Registry were submitted to primary or rescue PCI. The incidence of in-hospital major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) was compared. Results We evaluated 801 patients undergoing primary (n = 599) or rescue PCI (n = 202). In the rescue PCI group a lower frequency of thrombi, total occlusions, pre-procedure TIMI 0/1 flow and angiographically detectable collaterals was observed. The use of stents was similar, as well as the procedure success rates (91.7% vs 90.6%; P = 0.75). The incidence of MACCE (6.3% vs 6.9%; P = 0.89), death (4% vs 4%; P > 0.99), stroke (0.3% vs 0; P = 0.99) and reinfarction (2.7% vs 3%; P > 0.99) was not different between groups. In the multivariate analysis, the presence of dyslipidemia [odds ratio (OR) 2.190, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.14-4.16; P = 0.01], Killip class III or IV (OR 7.494, 95% CI 3.90-14.31; P  Conclusions In this contemporary registry, rescue and primary PCI had similar in-hospital results.