Outcomes of Direct Stenting Vs Predilatation in Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PPCI)

Abstract

This study investigates the outcomes of direct stenting versus predilatation in Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PPCI) for patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). The current study enrolled 200 patients in two groups with 100 patients in the Direct Stenting Group and 100 patients in the Predilatation Group in a prospective manner. The main measure of success was procedural success and the secondary endpoints are major adverse cardiac events (MACE), restenosis, and contrast induced nephropathy (CIN). In both groups, there was a high procedural success rate of 95% in Direct Stenting and 93% in Predilatation with no MACE or restenosis noted at the 6-month follow-up. But Direct Stenting was less time-consuming, having minimal use of contrast and fluoroscopic time as compared to the other techniques. Even though the usage of contrast in the Direct Stenting group was considerably low, the rate of CIN was similar to that of the Control group. Although the clinical success in both techniques is seemingly comparable, direct stenting lowers the complexity of the procedural process and reduces minutes spent performing PTCA in cases of simple coronary lesions. More research is required to assess precisely the indications for this procedure and to replicate these outcomes in extensive pathology.