Arq. Bras. Cardiol. 2021; 116(5): 856-864
Comparison of the Outcomes between Coronary No-Reflow and Slow-Flow Phenomenon in Non-STEMI Patients
This Original Article is referred by the Short Editorial "In Search of the Perfect Coronary Perfusion".
Abstract
Background:
Coronary slow-flow phenomenon (CSFP) and coronary no-reflow phenomenon (CNP) are associated with increased risk of major cardiovascular adverse events (MACE).
Objectives:
This study aimed to evaluate and compare the one-year clinical follow-up outcomes among patients with CNP and CSFP who underwent percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) in non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI).
Methods:
This study included a total of 858 patients who were diagnosed with NSTEMI and underwent PCI within 24 h of symptom onset. The patients were divided into two groups, the CSFP group (n=221) and the CNP group (n=25), regarding the angiographic characteristics of thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow of the infarct-related artery. Patients were followed for one-year. A p-value of <0.05 was considered significant.
Results:
CNP was observed in 2.91%, and CSFP was observed in 25.75% of the patients. Clinical endpoints analyzed that stroke was significantly higher in the CNP group than in the CSFP group (6 (24%) vs. 6 (2.70%), p<0.001) and MACE was significantly higher in the CNP group than in the CSFP group (11 (44%) vs. 51 (23.10%), p=0.022). Forward conditional logistic regression analysis demonstrated that body mass index (BMI) (OR=1.11, 95%CI: 1.00-1.24, p=0.038) and baseline heart rate (HR) (OR=0.923, 95%CI: 0.88-0.96, p<0.001) were the independent predictors of CNP in NSTEMI.
Conclusion:
CNP patients have worse clinical outcomes and a higher risk of stroke compared with CSFP patients in NSTEMI. (Arq Bras Cardiol. 2021; 116(5):856-864)
1,735
