Interventional & Peripheral Cards · Duke University
Summary
Obtaining informed consent for clinical trial participation in acute myocardial infarction presents unique ethical and logistical challenges because of the patient distress, sedation, and the urgency of treatment. Traditional consent procedures often conflict with the narrow enrollment windows, prompting the use of legally authorized representatives and short- and long-form consent models. Although these approaches enable faster trial enrollment, they may compromise patient autonomy, introduce selection bias, or create postenrollment ethical dilemmas. This review explores the complexities of informed consent in acute myocardial infarction research, evaluating the advantages and limitations of existing strategies, including legally authorized representative consent, 2-step consent processes, and alternatives such as deferred and verbal consent. It also examines international variations in regulatory oversight and presents emerging solutions, such as preemptive consent, opt-out models, electronic platforms, and registry-based trials, to streamline the enrollment without delaying care. Ultimately, consent regulations should be re-evaluated and potentially relaxed to better support timely research. A thoughtful reassessment of consent frameworks is essential to ethically and effectively advance acute myocardial infarction research in time-sensitive settings.
