Abstract
BACKGROUND: The selection of appropriate contrast media (CM) remains an important issue in terms of renal preservation in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and renal impairment scheduled for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We compared the clinical outcomes of patients with AMI and renal impairment, depending on the CM type (iso-osmolar CM [IOCM] vs. low-osmolar CM [LOCM]) that was used during PCI. METHODS: From the Convergent Registry of Catholic and Chonnam University for Acute Myocardial Infarction, 3174 post-PCI patients with AMI and renal impairment were subdivided into two groups (IOCM [n = 2101] and LOCM [n = 1073]). RESULTS: Regarding in-hospital clinical outcomes, the IOCM group had a higher peak creatinine (Cr) level and lower "Cr differential" than the LOCM group. A higher proportion of dialysis was noted in the IOCM group. In 30-day clinical outcomes, the IOCM group showed higher incidence of new-onset heart failure (HF) but lower incidence of revascularization than the LOCM group. The differences in in-hospital and 30-day clinical outcomes were attenuated after inverse probability of treatment weighting, except for new-onset HF. All other variables in 30-day clinical outcomes, including all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular accidents, stent thrombosis, and any dialysis events, were similar between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: IOCM use did not prevent future incidence of dialysis compared to LOCM use in AMI patients with renal impairment.