At a glance
ClinicalIndex Comparison RecordStandardized by ClinicalIndex from the ClinicalTrials.gov record · verify against the source.
Randomized Evaluation Of Intracoronary Nitroprusside vs Adenosine After Thrombus-aspiration During Primary PErcutaneous Coronary Intervention for the Prevention of No Reflow in Acute Myocardial Infarction
In Brief
A Phase 3 clinical trial evaluating adenosine, nitroprusside, and 1 other intervention for Myocardial Infarction. Completed, enrolled 240 participants across 1 site.
Detailed Summary
The occurrence of no-reflow phenomenon after recanalization of the infarct related artery in acute myocardial infarction is described in up to 40% of cases. This event is associated with a worse prognosis at follow up and an unfavourable left ventricular remodelling . Two main pathogenetic mechanisms cause no-reflow: distal embolization and ischemia-reperfusion injury. Due to the multifactorial pathogenesis of no-reflow during acute MI a combined mechanic and pharmacologic approach is believed to offer a better solution for achieving optimal microvascular reperfusion. Thus, in this randomized study we will assess the effect of nitroprusside or adenosine in adjunct to current best therapy (thrombus aspiration and IIb-IIIa antagonists) for ST elevation MI using ST segment resolution on standard 12 leads ECG as primary endpoint of myocardial reperfusion.
Study Details
Timeline
Interventions
Adenosine (80 mcg as fast bolus followed by 2 mg given in 33cc of saline in 2 minutes as slow bolus)
Nitroprusside (60 mcg as fast bolus followed by 100 mcg given in 33cc of 5% glucose in 2 minutes as slow bolus)
33 cc of heparinized saline given in 2 minutes as slow bolus