Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 


 
 Table of Contents  
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2022  |  Volume : 32  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 12-16

Left ventricular functional remodeling after primary percutaneous coronary intervention


1 Department of Cardiology, National Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Karachi, Pakistan
2 Department of Cardiology, Al Mana General Hospital, Eastern Region, Hofuf, Saudi Arabia
3 Department of Clinical Research, National Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Karachi, Pakistan

Date of Submission30-Aug-2021
Date of Decision22-Oct-2021
Date of Acceptance15-Dec-2021
Date of Web Publication20-Apr-2022

Correspondence Address:
Mahesh Kumar Batra
National Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Rafiqui (H.J.) Shaheed Road, Karachi 75510
Pakistan
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/jcecho.jcecho_64_21

Rights and Permissions
  Abstract 


Background: Improvement in left ventricular (LV) function after revascularization is an important determinant of long-term prognosis in a patient with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). However, data on the changes of LV function after revascularization are scarce in our population. Hence, this study was conducted to evaluate the changes in LV function and dimensions by echocardiography at 3 and 6 months after primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Materials and Methods: A total of 188 patients were recruited in this study who had undergone primary PCI. Patients with preexistent LV dysfunction, prior PCI, or with congenital heart disease were excluded. Echocardiography was performed at baseline (within 24 h of intervention), 3 months, and 6 months of intervention. Remodeling in terms of change in LV ejection fraction (LVEF), LV end-diastolic dimension (LVEDD), LV end-systolic dimension, and wall motion score index (WMSI) was evaluated. Results: Out of the 188 patients, 90.4% were male, and mean age was 53.94 ± 9.12 years. Baseline mean LVEF was 39.79 ± 6.2% with mean improvement of 5.11 ± 3.87 (P < 0.001) at 3 months and 6.38 ± 4.29 (P < 0.001) at 6 months. Baseline LVEDD was 46.23 ± 3.86 mm which improved to 44.68 ± 2.81 mm at 6 months. Basal WMSI decreased by -0.09 ± 0.08 and -0.13 ± 0.09 at 3 and 6 months, respectively, after revascularization. Conclusions: Primary PCI is the recommended mode of reperfusion in patients with AMI. It reduces infarct size, maintains microvascular integrity and preserves LV systolic function hence improving LV function.

Keywords: Left ventricular ejection fraction, left ventricular end-diastolic dimension, left ventricular end-systolic dimension, primary percutaneous coronary intervention, wall motion score index


How to cite this article:
Batra MK, Malik MA, Khan KA, Rai L, Kumar R, Shah JA, Sial JA, Saghir T, Khan N, Karim M. Left ventricular functional remodeling after primary percutaneous coronary intervention. J Cardiovasc Echography 2022;32:12-6

How to cite this URL:
Batra MK, Malik MA, Khan KA, Rai L, Kumar R, Shah JA, Sial JA, Saghir T, Khan N, Karim M. Left ventricular functional remodeling after primary percutaneous coronary intervention. J Cardiovasc Echography [serial online] 2022 [cited 2022 Aug 8];32:12-6. Available from: https://www.jcecho.org/text.asp?2022/32/1/12/343538




  Introduction Top


The presence of coronary artery disease carries poor prognosis. One presentation of coronary artery disease is acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). If not treated promptly, STEMI leads to grave patient outcomes because of left ventricular (LV) dysfunction. Early restoration of patency of infarct-related artery either by thrombolysis or primary angioplasty with a balloon or stent placement improves patient's survival by decreasing infarct size, preserving LV function, and decreasing the rate of complications.[1],[2] Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is the recommended standard of care for treating acute STEMI patients at present.[3] The primary objective of reperfusion is not only to restore patency of the infarct-related artery but also to preserve myocyte integrity, hence improving LV function.

In survivors of acute myocardial infarction (AMI), the most important predictor of long-term prognosis is an improvement in LV function, either systolic or diastolic. However, LV function may alter during the ensuing months of myocardial infarction, by process of remodeling and gradual relief of stunning.[4] Establishing the predictors of alterations in LV function may offer important acumen into the process of the changes in LV function and may have significant implications for therapeutic strategies.[4]

Various studies used different modalities for assessment of myocardial recovery after revascularization, such as longitudinal strain imaging,[5] layer-specific speckle tracking,[6],[7] cardiac MRI,[7],[8] radionuclide imaging,[4] all of which are highly cumbersome, costly and not readily available everywhere. In comparison, echocardiography is low cost, easy to perform, and readily available everywhere with nearly the same predictive value. Second, parameterization of LV functional remodeling (such as LV ejection fraction [LVEF], LV end-diastolic dimension (LVEDD), LV end-systolic dimension (LVEDS), and wall motion score index (WMSI)) is also variable. Hence, the aim of this study was to assess the changes in LVEF, LVEDD, LVEDS, and WMSI as a comprehensive assessment of LV functional remodeling after the 6th month of primary PCI using transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) as a cost effective and easy to perform modality.


  Materials and Methods Top


This prospective observational study was conducted between August 2018 and July 2020. Patients with AMI who underwent primary PCI at a tertiary care cardiac center in Karachi, Pakistan were recruited. Patients with preexistent LV dysfunction, history of past PCI, and congenital heart disease were excluded from the study. After approval from the ethical review committee of the institution, the required number of patients who fulfilled the inclusion criteria were enrolled. Informed consent was obtained from all the participating patients. Patient's preprocedural demographic characteristics, angiographic details, and echocardiographic parameters were obtained. TTE was performed for all recruited patients at baseline (within 24 h of intervention), 3 months and 6 months, to assess LV functional remodeling by experienced echocardiographers on Vivid 7 machine. In order to minimize the inter-observer variations, all TTE were reported by the two independent cardiologists blinded to the patients' clinical status and one another's assessments. The final measurements were taken as mean of the two assessments. Cases with more than 5% variation in any of the parameter measurements were not included in the final analysis. However, intra-observer variation could not be assessed due to single reading reporting by the each cardiologist.

Echocardiographic parameters of interest were LVEF, LVEDD, LVEDS, and WMSI. LVEF was obtained using modified Simpson method; cardiac chambers were quantified using two chamber, four chamber and short axis views.

WMSI was calculated using TTE, which has been reported to have a strong correlation with cardiac MRI. Each of 16 myocardial segments was assigned a score of 1, 2 or 3: 1-normal, 2-hypokinesis, and 3–-akinesis. Sum of the scores of all segments was divided by the total number of segments to obtain WMSI. All collected data were recorded on a preapproved, designated and structured pro forma.

The collected data were entered into IBM SPSS Version 21.0. (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, US). After quality assessment, descriptive summary of data such as frequency (%) and mean ± standard deviation were computed for the categorical and continuous variables, respectively. Changes in echocardiographic parameters (LVEF, LVEDD, LVEDS, and WMSI) at 3 and 6 months were assessed by computing mean differences and by performing paired-sample t-test for quantitative comparison and Chi-square test for qualitative (categorical) comparison. A two-sided P ≤ 0.05 was taken as criteria for statistical significance.


  Results Top


A total of 188 patients were included, 90.4% of them were male, with a mean age of 53.94 ± 9.12 years. Traditional risk factors of coronary artery disease were present in the frequency of 24.5%, 40.4%, and 39.4% for diabetes, hypertension, and smoking, respectively. The mean symptom onset to device activation time was 5.27 ± 2.69 h. Anterior wall myocardial infarction was the most common type of infarction presented in 59.6% of individuals, followed by inferior wall myocardial infarction and lateral wall myocardial infarction. Thrombolysis in myocardial infarction flow grade 0 was noted in 47.9% preprocedure. Baseline demographic and angiographic characteristics are summarized in [Table 1].
Table 1: Baseline demographic and angiographic characteristics

Click here to view


Echocardiography performed at baseline (within 24 h of intervention) in all recruited patients, showed LVEF of 39.79 ± 6.2%, LVEDD, 46.23 ± 3.86 mm, LVEDS, 35.96 ± 4.42 mm, and WMSI, 1.61 ± 0.25. Echocardiographic parameters within 24 h of intervention are presented in [Table 2].
Table 2: Echocardiographic parameters within 24 h of intervention

Click here to view


Mean improvement in LVEF (%) was found to be 5.11 ± 3.87 at 3 months (P < 0.001) and 6.38 ± 4.29 (P < 0.001) at 6 months. LVEF improved in 75.5% and remain the same in the remaining 24.5% of the patients (P < 0.001) at 6 months of intervention. Improvements were also noted in in LVEDS and LVEDD on follow-up. Segmental wall motion abnormalities, calculated and presented in the form of WMSI, also showed improvement when compared to baseline score. Difference from baseline at 6 months was -0.13 ± 0.09. Follow-up echocardiographic parameters are presented in [Table 3] and schematized in [Figure 1].
Figure 1: Comparison of echocardiographic parameters at baseline, after 3 months, and 6 months of the procedure. LVEF = left ventricular ejection fraction, LVEDD = left ventricular end-diastolic dimension, LVEDS = left ventricular end-systolic dimension

Click here to view
Table 3: Echocardiographic assessment of patients after 3 and 6 months of intervention

Click here to view



  Discussion Top


This study demonstrated a significant difference in the recovery of LV function in patients with AMI who underwent primary percutaneous intervention. The mean LVEF at baseline was 39.79 ± 6.2% which improved to 46.17 ± 6.18% at 6 months with mean improvement of 6.38 ± 4.29% (P < 0.001). Along with LVEF, we observed changes in other echocardiographic parameters such as LVEDD, LVEDS, and WMSI. Improvement in such parameters has great clinical relevance.

A study conducted by Ottervanger et al.[4] recruited patients with AMI who underwent primary percutaneous therapy. The study showed mean improvement in LVEF of 6% from 43.7 ± 11.3% at baseline to 46.3 ± 11.5% at 6 months, using radionuclide ventriculography in survivors at 6th month postintervention. These results are almost consistent with our study results, which is purely TTE based. Another study conducted by Baks et al.[3] reported an increase in ejection fraction from 48 ± 11% to 55 ± 9% (P ≤ 0.01), after 5 months of successful placement of a drug-eluting stent in twenty-two patients. This study also showed improvement in the WMS index from 1.86 (0.23) to 0.32 (0.34), with a P < 0.001 in the 6th month. However, the sample size of the study was far smaller than ours. Similarly, another study conducted by Wang et al.[6] reported increased LVEF from 59.35 ± 10.16% preoperatively, to 65.86 ± 9.83% after 6 months of indexed AMI.

Sharif et al.[9] concluded that LV WMS index improves with early restoration of blood flow through coronary arteries. We also studied WMSI, which showed similar consistent improvement of −0.09 ± 0.08 and −0.13 ± 0.09 at 3 and 6 months respectively.

Niccoli et al.[10] and other clinical trials[11],[12],[13],[14] assesses the importance of micro vasculature on myocardial function recovery in patients with acute myocardial function showed the myocardial remodeling and stunning are the predictors of prognosis.

Reason behind quoting various studies is that they used different modalities which are highly cumbersome, costly, and not widely available for the assessment of myocardial recovery such as longitudinal strain imaging,[5] layer-specific speckle tracking,[7] cardiac MRI,[7],[8] radionuclide imaging,[4] than echocardiographic parameters (LVEF, LVEDD, LVEDS, and WMSI) which are convenient and cost-effective with almost same results.

A key strength our study is that it is the first of its kind in our population, performed at a state of the art cardiac care facility of the country. However, despite very careful and extensive scrutiny our study has certain limitations. First, it is a single-center-based study. Second, baseline echocardiography was performed within 24 h of procedure and not at patient presentation. Hence, it is very difficult to predict the improvement of LV function from before to after the procedure. This is because as per the guidelines we do not routinely perform echocardiography before primary PCI to minimize delays from the onset of symptoms to device activation time.


  Conclusions Top


This study demonstrated that primary PCI therapy not only reduces infarct size and preserves LV systolic function but also maintains microvascular integrity, thereby decreasing LV remodeling. LV functional remodeling has great impact on prognosis. Echocardiographic parameters (LVEF, LVEDD, LVEDS, and WMSI) can be used to detect LV functional remodeling in postprimary PCI patients rather than utilizing other cumbersome techniques as done in previous studies.

Ethical clearance

This study was approval by the ethical review committee of the National Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases (NICVD), Karachi (ERC-22/2018). Written informed consent was obtained from all the patients regarding their participation in the study and publication of data while maintaining confidentiality and anonymity.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.



 
  References Top

1.
Sheiban I, Fragasso G, Rosano GM, Dharmadhikari A, Tzifos V, Pagnotta P, et al. Time course and determinants of left ventricular function recovery after primary angioplasty in patients with acute myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001;38:464-71.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Bax M, de Winter RJ, Schotborgh CE, Koch KT, Meuwissen M, Voskuil M, et al. Short-and long-term recovery of left ventricular function predicted at the time of primary percutaneous coronary intervention in anterior myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;43:534-41.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Baks T, van Geuns RJ, Biagini E, Wielopolski P, Mollet NR, Cademartiri F, et al. Recovery of left ventricular function after primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J 2005;26:1070-7.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Ottervanger JP, van't Hof AW, Reiffers S, Hoorntje JC, Suryapranata H, de Boer MJ, et al. Long-term recovery of left ventricular function after primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J 2001;22:785-90.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Mandal MR, Ahsan SA, Hoque H, Kabir MF, Khaled FI, Mahbub SE, et al. Comparison of pre and post global longitudinal strain imaging in thrombolytic and primary percutaneous coronary intervention in acute ST elevation anterior myocardial infarction. Univ Heart J 2020;16:11-5.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Wang P, Liu Y, Ren L. Evaluation of left ventricular function after percutaneous recanalization of chronic coronary occlusions: The role of two-dimensional speckle tracking echocardiography. Herz 2019;44:170-4.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
Sun JP, Liang Y, Zhang F, Chen X, Yuan W, Xu L, et al. Serial assessment of focal myocardial function after percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction: Value of layer-specific speckle tracking echocardiography. Echocardiography 2020;37:1413-21.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Al-Sabeq B, Nabi F, Shah DJ. Assessment of myocardial viability by cardiac MRI. Curr Opin Cardiol 2019;34:502-9.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Sharif D, Matanis W, Sharif-Rasslan A, Rosenschein U. Doppler echocardiographic myocardial stunning index predicts recovery of left ventricular systolic function after primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Echocardiography 2016;33:1465-71.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Niccoli G, Montone RA, Ibanez B, Thiele H, Crea F, Heusch G, et al. Optimized treatment of ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Circ Res 2019;125:245-58.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Mujtaba SF, Khan MN, Sohail H, Sial JA, Karim M, Saghir T, et al. Outcome at six months after primary percutaneous coronary interventions performed at a rural satellite center of Sindh province of Pakistan. Cureus 2020;12:e8345.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Ozaki Y, Katagiri Y, Onuma Y, Amano T, Muramatsu T, Kozuma K, et al. CVIT expert consensus document on primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in 2018. Cardiovasc Interv Ther 2018;33:178-203.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Mentias A, Raza MQ, Barakat AF, Youssef D, Raymond R, Menon V, et al. Effect of shorter door-to-balloon times over 20 years on outcomes of patients with anterior ST-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous Coronary intervention. Am J Cardiol 2017;120:1254-9.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
Montaser SS, Elnoamany MF, Elbokary AH, Emam AY. Early and late assessment of left ventricular function using global longitudinal strain after primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Cardiol Cardiovasc Res 2020;4:180-6.  Back to cited text no. 14
    


    Figures

  [Figure 1]
 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3]



 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
Access Statistics
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)

 
  In this article
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Me...
Results
Discussion
Conclusions
References
Article Figures
Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed583    
    Printed20    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded82    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal


[TAG2]
[TAG3]
[TAG4]