Download PDF
Int J Angiol
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-1764475
Case Report

How an Aggressive Treatment of No-reflow Phenomenon in Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with High Thrombus Burden can Achieve a Grade III TIMI-flow: A Case Report

Januar Wibawa Martha 
1   Department of Cardiology and Vascular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine University of Padjadjaran, Bandung, Indonesia
,
Iwan Cahyo Santosa Putra 
1   Department of Cardiology and Vascular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine University of Padjadjaran, Bandung, Indonesia
,
William Kamarullah 
2   R. Syamsudin SH Regional Public Hospital, Sukabumi, West Java, Indonesia
,
Aron Husink
3   Department of Cardiology and Vascular Medicine, Elang Medika Corpora Tangerang Hospital, Tangerang, Indonesia
,
Teddy Arnold Sihite
1   Department of Cardiology and Vascular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine University of Padjadjaran, Bandung, Indonesia
› Author Affiliations Funding None.
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Introduction The management of the no-reflow phenomenon is still being debated by experts as there is no specific algorithm, limited recommended drug choices, and insufficient data regarding the combination of drugs in currently available guidelines. Thus, in this case report, we would like to propose a new combination of drugs as an alternative to the recommended drugs of choice in the treatment of no-reflow phenomenon.

Case Presentation A 41-year-old man arrived at the emergency department complaining of chest pain 30 minutes prior to arrival. However, the patient was later diagnosed with extensive anterior ST-elevation myocardial infarction, KILLIP classification I, which was caused by the entire blockage of the proximal left anterior descending coronary artery. Angiography was conducted after stent placement during the main percutaneous coronary intervention and revealed grade I thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI)-flow with no coronary artery blockage. We then used an intracoronary approach to give nitroglycerin, heparin, and eptifibatide. The findings of posttreatment angiography revealed an improvement in coronary blood flow with a grade II TIMI flow. Furthermore, intravenous injection of eptifibatide and morphine effectively restored perfusion to a grade III TIMI flow.

Conclusion Aggressive and precise treatment with a drug of choice is required to counteract the no-reflow phenomenon. Presently, only a limited range of first-line medications are available to treat this condition. Not only that, but several of the prescribed medications are not easily accessible, especially in developing countries. Therefore, we offer a novel combination medicaments consisting of nitroglycerin, heparin, and glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor as an alternative treatment of the no-reflow phenomenon.

Keywords

no-reflow phenomenon - primary PCI - nitroglycerin - heparin - glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor

Authors' Contributions

J.W.M., I.C.S.P., and A.H. conceived and design the study. J.W.M., I.C.S.P., and W.K. performed literature research, acquired the data, and drafting the manuscript. J.W.M., A.H., and T.A.S. provided revision, supervision, and final approval of the manuscript. All authors approved the final manuscript.




Publication History

Article published online:
10 April 2023

© 2023. International College of Angiology. This article is published by Thieme.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Klein LW, Kern MJ, Berger P. et al; Interventional Cardiology Committee of the Society of Cardiac Angiography and Interventions. Society of cardiac angiography and interventions: suggested management of the no-reflow phenomenon in the cardiac catheterization laboratory. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2003; 60 (02) 194-201
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Niccoli G, Burzotta F, Galiuto L, Crea F. Myocardial no-reflow in humans. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009; 54 (04) 281-292
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Schwartz BG, Kloner RA. Coronary no reflow. J Mol Cell Cardiol 2012; 52 (04) 873-882
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Gibson CM, Schömig A. Coronary and myocardial angiography: angiographic assessment of both epicardial and myocardial perfusion. Circulation 2004; 109 (25) 3096-3105
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Ibanez B, James S, Agewall S. et al; ESC Scientific Document Group. 2017 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation: The Task Force for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur Heart J 2018; 39 (02) 119-177
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Caiazzo G, Musci RL, Frediani L. et al. State of the art: no-reflow phenomenon. Cardiol Clin 2020; 38 (04) 563-573
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Harrison RW, Aggarwal A, Ou FS. et al; American College of Cardiology National Cardiovascular Data Registry. Incidence and outcomes of no-reflow phenomenon during percutaneous coronary intervention among patients with acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol 2013; 111 (02) 178-184
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Alfayoumi F, Srinivasan V, Geller M, Gradman A. The no-reflow phenomenon: epidemiology, pathophysiology, and therapeutic approach. Rev Cardiovasc Med 2005; 6 (02) 72-83
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Alidoosti M, Lotfi R, Lotfi-Tokaldany M. et al. Correlates of the “no-reflow” or “slow-flow” phenomenon in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention. J Tehran Heart Cent 2018; 13 (03) 108-114
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Bolognese L, Carrabba N, Parodi G. et al. Impact of microvascular dysfunction on left ventricular remodeling and long-term clinical outcome after primary coronary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction. Circulation 2004; 109 (09) 1121-1126
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Ndrepepa G, Tiroch K, Fusaro M. et al. 5-year prognostic value of no-reflow phenomenon after percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010; 55 (21) 2383-2389
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Nairooz R, Feldman DN, Rochlani Y. et al. Impact of intraprocedural thrombotic events on short- and long-term outcomes following percutaneous coronary intervention. Evidence from a meta-analysis. Int J Cardiol 2016; 202: 469-476
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Levine GN, Bates ER, Blankenship JC. et al. 2011 ACCF/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines and the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions. Circulation 2011; 124 (23) e574-e651
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Fajar JK, Heriansyah T, Rohman MS. The predictors of no reflow phenomenon after percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction: A meta-analysis. Indian Heart J 2018; 70 (Suppl 3, Suppl 3): S406-S418
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Rezkalla SH, Dharmashankar KC, Abdalrahman IB, Kloner RA. No-reflow phenomenon following percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction: incidence, outcome, and effect of pharmacologic therapy. J Interv Cardiol 2010; 23 (05) 429-436
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Niccoli G, Marino M, Spaziani C, Crea F. Prevention and treatment of no-reflow. Acute Card Care 2010; 12 (03) 81-91
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Karimianpour A, Maran A. Advances in coronary no-reflow phenomenon-a contemporary review. Curr Atheroscler Rep 2018; 20 (09) 44
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Berg R, Buhari C. Treating and preventing no reflow in the cardiac catheterization laboratory. Curr Cardiol Rev 2012; 8 (03) 209-214
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Thiele H, Schindler K, Friedenberger J. et al. Intracoronary compared with intravenous bolus abciximab application in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention: the randomized Leipzig immediate percutaneous coronary intervention abciximab IV versus IC in ST-elevation myocardial infarction trial. Circulation 2008; 118 (01) 49-57
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Valgimigli M, Biondi-Zoccai GGL, Agostoni P. Clinical implications of the PROTECT-TIMI-30 trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007; 49 (06) 729-730 , author reply 730–731
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Werner GS, Lang K, Kuehnert H, Figulla HR. Intracoronary verapamil for reversal of no-reflow during coronary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2002; 57 (04) 444-451
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Alamri HS, Almoghairi AM, Alghamdi AA. et al. Efficacy of a single dose intravenous heparin in reducing sheath-thrombus formation during diagnostic angiography: A randomized controlled trial. J Saudi Heart Assoc 2012; 24 (01) 3-7
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Fischell TA, Haller S, Pulukurthy S, Virk IS. Nicardipine and adenosine “flush cocktail” to prevent no-reflow during rotational atherectomy. Cardiovasc Revasc Med 2008; 9 (04) 224-228
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Matsuo H, Watanabe S, Watanabe T. et al. Prevention of no-reflow/slow-flow phenomenon during rotational atherectomy–a prospective randomized study comparing intracoronary continuous infusion of verapamil and nicorandil. Am Heart J 2007; 154 (05) 994.e1-994.e6
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Hirsh J, Anand SS, Halperin JL, Fuster V. Mechanism of action and pharmacology of unfractionated heparin. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 2001; 21 (07) 1094-1096
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Baldus S, Rudolph V, Roiss M. et al. Heparins increase endothelial nitric oxide bioavailability by liberating vessel-immobilized myeloperoxidase. Circulation 2006; 113 (15) 1871-1878
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar