A Phase 4 interventional study of Primary angioplasty in acute myocardial infarction in Myocardial Infarction, sponsored by San Camillo Hospital, Rome. Status unknown at 1 site in Italy. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2006-02-10.
Sponsored by San Camillo Hospital, Rome · Phase 4, Interventional, and Treatment
The incidence of stent restenosis in the setting of primary angioplasty is particularly high, reaching a rate of 27% In the last years the introduction of drug-eluting stents has drastically reduced the incidence of restenosis in patients not requiring urgent revascularization. Whether drug-eluting stenting might constitute the new optimal therapy for patients with an acute myocardial infarction is unknown. To be able to answer this question, we designed a randomized trial in which patients with an acute myocardial infarction eligible for treatment with primary angioplasty and abciximab were randomized to receive either a rapamicine-eluting stent or a conventional bare stent.
The treatment of acute myocardial infarction has evolved dramatically in the last decade. Coronary angioplasty with stent implantation in conjunction with an optimal antitrombotic therapy as abciximab is now considered current standard therapy However, the incidence of stent restenosis in the setting of primary angioplasty remains particularly high, reaching a rate of 27%. A high restenosis rate causes a high re-hospitalization rate for target vessel revascularization and an ensuing increase in cost.In the last years the introduction of drug-eluting stents has drastically reduced the incidence of restenosis in patients not requiring urgent revascularization. This reduced incidence of restenosis occurs without an increase in adverse clinical events over conventional stents and has a very low rate of stent subacute thrombosis. Whether this combination of drug-eluting stents and abciximab might constitute the new optimal therapy for patients with an acute myocardial infarction is unknown. To be able to answer this question, we designed a one year coronary angiographic study in which patients with an acute myocardial infarction eligible for treatment with primary angioplasty and abciximab were randomized to receive either a rapamicine-eluting stent or a conventional bare stent.
2,744 studies on the registry are indexed under Myocardial Infarction; 418 are open to participants now.
Browse Myocardial Infarction studies →San Camillo Hospital, Rome is the lead sponsor of 5 studies on the registry; 1 is open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Inclusion criteria were an age of more than 18 years, the presence for at least 30 minutes but less than 12 hours of symptoms consistent with acute myocardial infarction, and the presence of ST-segment elevation in at least two contiguous leads or left bundle-branch block.
-
Exclusion Criteria:
Patients were excluded if they were in cardiogenic shock (defined as systolic blood pressure of less than 80 mm Hg for more than 30 minutes or the need for intravenous pressors or intraaortic-balloon counterpulsation); had a history of bleeding diathesis; had a history of leukopenia, thrombocytopenia, or severe hepatic or renal dysfunction; had a noncardiac illness associated with a life expectancy of less than one year; were participating in another study; or were unable to give informed consent owing to prolonged cardiopulmonary resuscitation.
-
The primary end point for the trial was the binary restonis at one year angiographic follow-up
Secondary end points included a composite of
MACE including death, Q-wave and non-Q-wave infarction, emergent bypass surgery, or repeat TLR at 30 days and 12 months after the index procedure
This study is status unknown, as verified in Feb 2006. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
San Camillo Hospital, Rome