4.4 Article

Effect of additional treatment with EXenatide in patients with an Acute Myocardial Infarction (EXAMI): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Journal

TRIALS
Volume 12, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

BIOMED CENTRAL LTD
DOI: 10.1186/1745-6215-12-240

Keywords

exenatide; glucagon-like peptide 1; myocardial infarction; reperfusion injury

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Myocardial infarction causes irreversible loss of cardiomyocytes and may lead to loss of ventricular function, morbidity and mortality. Infarct size is a major prognostic factor and reduction of infarct size has therefore been an important objective of strategies to improve outcomes. In experimental studies, glucagon-like peptide 1 and exenatide, a long acting glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist, a novel drug introduced for the treatment of type 2 diabetes, reduced infarct size after myocardial infarction by activating pro-survival pathways and by increasing metabolic efficiency. Methods: The EXAMI trial is a multi-center, prospective, randomized, placebo controlled trial, designed to evaluate clinical outcome of exenatide infusion on top of standard treatment, in patients with an acute myocardial infarction, successfully treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention. A total of 108 patients will be randomized to exenatide (5 mu g bolus in 30 minutes followed by continuous infusion of 20 mu g/24 h for 72 h) or placebo treatment. The primary end point of the study is myocardial infarct size (measured using magnetic resonance imaging with delayed enhancement at 4 months) as a percentage of the area at risk (measured using T2 weighted images at 3-7 days). Discussion: If the current study demonstrates cardioprotective effects, exenatide may constitute a novel therapeutic option to reduce infarct size and preserve cardiac function in adjunction to reperfusion therapy in patients with acute myocardial infarction.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available