Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 7, 2026
A Murine Model of Stent Implantation in the Carotid Artery for the Study of Restenosis
Published on: May 14, 2013
[Long-term follow-up after primary angioplasty: is stenting beneficial?]
J Roncalli1, M Galinier, J Fourcade
1Service de cardiologie A, département de cardiologie, fédération des services de cardiologie, CHU de Rangueil, 1, avenue Jean-Poulhès, 31403 Toulouse, France. roncalli.j@chu-toulouse.fr
Insights
Primary stenting and balloon angioplasty show similar long-term outcomes for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients. Stenting does not improve prognosis over three years, with comparable rates of major adverse cardiac events and reinterventions.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Interventional Cardiology
- Acute Myocardial Infarction Management
Background:
- Primary stenting shows short-term benefits over balloon angioplasty in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) trials.
- Limited data exist on the long-term efficacy of primary stenting in AMI patients.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the three-year outcomes of primary stenting versus balloon angioplasty in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI).
Main Methods:
- Retrospective study of 157 AMI patients treated within six hours of chest pain onset.
- Comparison between balloon angioplasty (N=48) and primary stenting (N=109) groups.
- Outcomes assessed over three years, including mortality, major adverse cardiac events (MACE), reinterventions, and target vessel revascularization (TVR).
Main Results:
- No significant difference in in-patient or three-year mortality between the groups.
- Similar rates of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (27.8% vs 31.7%).
- Comparable rates of reinterventions (20.4% vs 24.7%) and target vessel revascularization (TVR) (18.6% vs 17.8%) between balloon angioplasty and primary stenting.
Conclusions:
- Primary stenting does not offer long-term prognostic improvement compared to balloon angioplasty in acute myocardial infarction (AMI).
- Long-term outcomes, including MACE, reinterventions, and TVR, are similar for both treatment strategies.
- The underlying atherosclerosis, not the intervention type, appears to dictate long-term prognosis in AMI.
Background:
Primary stenting leads to a better short-term outcome than balloon angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction in randomised trials. However few data are available about the long-term outcome of primary stenting in acute myocardial infarction (AMI).
Objectives:
The aim of this study was to compare the three-year outcome after primary stenting versus balloon angioplasty in patients with acute myocardial infarction.
Methods:
We conducted a retrospective study including 157 patients with AMI in a single center. Patients underwent balloon angioplasty (N = 48) or primary stenting (N = 109) within six hours after the onset of chest pain. We looked at the outcome during three years focusing on global mortality, major adverse cardiac events (MACE), reinterventions and target vessel revascularization (TVR).
Results:
The two groups are similar for their baseline characteristics. No difference was noted for in-patient mortality in the balloon angioplasty group and the primary stenting group (2.1 vs 2.8%; P = ns). The three-year mortality was not significantly different in the two groups. Regarding MACE (27.8 vs 31.7; P = 0.95), reinterventions (20.4 vs 24.7%; P = 0.98) and TVR (18.6 vs 17.8%; P = 0.69), both groups were statistically not different.
Conclusion:
In the long-term patients treated with stent placement have similar rates of MACE, reinterventions or TVR than patients undergoing balloon angioplasty. If few studies noted a benefit in short-term outcomes, primary stenting doesn't improve the prognosis of acute myocardial infarction on long-term follow-up, which is dependent on atherosclerosis.
Related Concept Videos
01:30Acute Coronary Syndrome I: Introduction
01:27Peripheral Artery Disease III: Interprofessional Care
01:23Peripheral Artery Disease V: Postoperative Nursing Management