Literature DB >> 20027110

Coronary revascularization strategy for ST elevation myocardial infarction with multivessel disease: experience and results at 1-year follow-up.

Tamam Mohamad1, Juan M Bernal, Ashok Kondur, Pawan Hari, Katrina Nelson, Ashutosh Niraj, Apurva Badheka, Samer Hassna, Tom Kiernan, Mahir D Elder, Delair Gardi, Theodore Schreiber.   

Abstract

Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of culprit lesions (CLs) is the standard of care in patients presenting with ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). However, optimal revascularization strategy for significant nonculprit lesions (non-CLs) in the setting of STEMI remains controversial. The importance of defining of such a strategy lies in the fact that approximately 50% of patients with STEMI have multivessel disease (MVD). The aim of this study was to describe characteristics, therapeutic strategies, and 1-year outcomes in a cohort of patients with STEMI and MVD. We retrospectively analyzed a cohort of 63 patients with STEMI and MVD obtained from a 5-year catheterization database. MVD was defined as ≥70% stenosis of ≥2 epicardial coronary arteries. This cohort was followed for a period of 1 year for major adverse cardiac events (MACE was defined as acute coronary syndrome, new onset heart failure, or death) and all-cause mortality. PCI with stent placement was the major therapeutic procedure (87.5%) performed for CLs. Non-CLs did not undergo interventions in a majority of individuals (47.6%), while the remaining patients underwent PCI (29%) and coronary artery bypass graft surgery (22%) for non-CLs. At 1-year follow-up, prevalence of MACE events and death in the entire cohort were 30% and 15%, respectively. A trend for better outcomes (1-year cumulative MACE events but not mortality) was observed in CL-only intervention cohort compared with non-CL intervention. The PCI and Coronary artery bypass graft surgery cohorts did not show any significant difference in clinical outcomes. In this retrospective cohort of patients with MVD who presented with STEMI, no intervention of noncritical lesions was the prevalent approach, reflecting guideline recommendations. CL-only intervention strategy showed a better clinical outcome than non-CL intervention. Intervention of noncritical lesions therefore did not seem to improve MACEs or all-cause mortality at 1-year of follow-up and might in fact have had a detrimental effect on outcomes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 20027110     DOI: 10.1097/MJT.0b013e3181b809ee

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Ther        ISSN: 1075-2765            Impact factor:   2.688


  9 in total

1.  Clinical impact of simultaneous complete revascularization vs. culprit only primary angioplasty in patients with st-elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Eliano Pio Navarese; Stefano De Servi; Antonino Buffon; Harry Suryapranata; Giuseppe De Luca
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 2.300

Review 2.  Reperfusion strategies in acute myocardial infarction and multivessel disease.

Authors:  Birgit Vogel; Shamir R Mehta; Roxana Mehran
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2017-06-29       Impact factor: 32.419

Review 3.  Complete versus culprit-only revascularization in ST-elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease.

Authors:  Giuseppe Di Pasquale; Elisa Filippini; Pier Camillo Pavesi; Gianfranco Tortorici; Gianni Casella; Pietro Sangiorgio
Journal:  Intern Emerg Med       Date:  2016-03-07       Impact factor: 3.397

Review 4.  How to treat patients with ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction and multi-vessel disease?

Authors:  Petr Widimsky; David R Holmes
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2010-11-30       Impact factor: 29.983

5.  Culprit vessel only versus multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease.

Authors:  Dongfeng Zhang; Xiantao Song; Shuzheng Lv; Fei Yuan; Feng Xu; Min Zhang; Wei Li; Shuai Yan
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-03-20       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 6.  Staged versus One-Time Complete Revascularization with Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in STEMI Patients with Multivessel Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Zhenwei Li; Yijiang Zhou; Qingqing Xu; Xiaomin Chen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-01-20       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Optimal Timing of Surgical Revascularization for Myocardial Infarction and Left Ventricular Dysfunction.

Authors:  Rong Wang; Nan Cheng; Cang-Song Xiao; Yang Wu; Xiao-Yong Sai; Zhi-Yun Gong; Yao Wang; Chang-Qing Gao
Journal:  Chin Med J (Engl)       Date:  2017-02-20       Impact factor: 2.628

Review 8.  Revascularization strategies for patients with myocardial infarction and multi-vessel disease: A critical appraisal of the current evidence.

Authors:  Muhammad O Zaman; Mohammad K Mojadidi; Islam Y Elgendy
Journal:  J Geriatr Cardiol       Date:  2019-09       Impact factor: 3.327

Review 9.  Immediate versus staged revascularisation of non-culprit arteries in patients with acute coronary syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  P A Vriesendorp; J M Wilschut; R Diletti; J Daemen; I Kardys; F Zijlstra; N M Van Mieghem; J Bennett; G Esposito; M Sabate; W K den Dekker
Journal:  Neth Heart J       Date:  2022-05-10       Impact factor: 2.854

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.