Suspected acute myocardial infarction is one of the leading causes of admission to emergency departments. In the last decade, biomarkers revolutionized the management of patients with suspected acute coronary syndromes. Besides their pivotal assistance in timely diagnosis, biomarkers provide additional information for risk stratification. Cardiac troponins I and T are the most sensitive and specific markers of acute myocardial injury. Nonetheless, in order to overcome the remaining limitations of these markers, novel candidate biomarkers sensitive to early stage of disease are being extensively investigated. Among them, copeptin, a stable peptide derived from the precursor of vasopressin, emerged as a promising biomarker for the evaluation of suspected acute myocardial infarction. In this review, we summarize the currently available evidence for the usefulness of copeptin in the diagnosis and risk stratification of patients with suspected acute myocardial infarction in comparison with routine biomarkers.

While early coronary reperfusion via primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) is established as the most efficacious therapy for minimizing infarct size (IS) in acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), the restoration of blood flow also introduces myocardial ischemia-reperfusion injury (IRI), leading to cardiomyocyte death. Among diverse methods, ischemic conditioning (IC), achieved through repetitive cycles of ischemia and reperfusion, has emerged as the most promising method to mitigate IRI. IC can be performed by applying the protective stimulus directly to the affected myocardium or indirectly to non-affected tissue, which is known as remote ischemic conditioning (RIC). In clinical practice, RIC is often applied by serial inflations and deflations of a blood pressure cuff on a limb. Despite encouraging preclinical studies, as well as clinical studies demonstrating reductions in enzymatic IS and myocardial injury on imaging, the observed impact on clinical outcome has been disappointing so far. Nevertheless, previous studies indicate a potential benefit of IC in high-risk STEMI patients. Additional research is needed to evaluate the impact of IC in such high-risk cohorts. The objective of this review is to summarize the pathophysiological background and preclinical and clinical data of IRI reduction by IC.

Objectives: To analyze the use and prognostic impact of active mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices in a large prospective contemporary cohort of patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) complicating acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Background: Although increasingly used in clinical practice, data on the efficacy and safety of active MCS devices in patients with CS complicating AMI are limited. Methods: This is a predefined subanalysis of the CULPRIT-SHOCK randomized trial and prospective registry. Patients with CS, AMI and multivessel coronary artery disease were categorized in two groups: (1) use of at least one active MCS device vs. (2) no active MCS or use of intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) only. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death or renal replacement therapy at 30 days. Results: Two hundred of 1055 (19%) patients received at least one active MCS device (n = 112 Impella^®; n = 95 extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO); n = 6 other devices). The primary endpoint occurred significantly more often in patients treated with active MCS devices compared with those without active MCS devices (142 of 197, 72% vs. 374 of 827, 45%; p < 0.001). All-cause mortality and bleeding rates were significantly higher in the active MCS group (all p < 0.001). After multivariable adjustment, the use of active MCS was significantly associated with the primary endpoint (odds ratio (OR) 4.0, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.7–5.9; p < 0.001). Conclusions: In the CULPRIT-SHOCK trial, active MCS devices were used in approximately one fifth of patients. Patients treated with active MCS devices showed worse outcome at 30 days and 1 year.

Current evidence regarding the effect of intravenous morphine administration on reperfusion injury and/or cardioprotection in patients with myocardial infarction is conflicting. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of morphine administration, on infarct size and reperfusion injury assessed by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) in a large multicenter ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) population. In total, 734 STEMI patients reperfused by primary percutaneous coronary intervention <12 h after symptom onset underwent CMR imaging at eight centers for assessment of myocardial damage. Intravenous morphine administration was recorded in all patients. CMR was completed within one week after infarction using a standardized protocol. The clinical endpoint of the study was the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) within 12 months after infarction. Intravenous morphine was administered in 61.8% (n = 454) of all patients. There were no differences in infarct size (17%LV, interquartile range [IQR] 8–25%LV versus 16%LV, IQR 8–26%LV, p = 0.67) and microvascular obstruction (p = 0.92) in patients with versus without morphine administration. In the subgroup of patients with early reperfusion within 120 min and reduced flow of the infarcted vessel (TIMI-flow ≤2 before PCI) morphine administration resulted in significantly smaller infarcts (12%LV, IQR 12–19 versus 19%LV, IQR 10–29, p = 0.035) and reduced microvascular obstruction (p = 0.003). Morphine administration had no effect on hard clinical endpoints (log-rank test p = 0.74) and was not an independent predictor of clinical outcome in Cox regression analysis. In our large multicenter CMR study, morphine administration did not have a negative effect on myocardial damage or clinical prognosis in acute reperfused STEMI. In patients, presenting early ( ≤120 min) morphine may have a cardioprotective effect as reflected by smaller infarcts; but this finding has to be assessed in further well-designed clinical studies