Literature DB >> 25689544

Preventive versus culprit-only percutaneous coronary intervention in ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients with multivessel disease: a meta-analysis.

Yeo-Jeong Song1, Ho-Cheol Shin, Joo-Ii Yang, Ho-Young Lee, Han-Young Jin, Jeong-Sook Seo, Tae-Hyun Yang, Dae-Kyeong Kim, Dong-Soo Kim, Jae-Sik Jang.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although previous studies have suggested clinical benefits of complete revascularization in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease, it is still controversial whether preventive percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) leads to better clinical outcomes in the clinical setting of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).
METHODS: Relevant studies through September 2014 were searched and identified in the electronic databases.Primary endpoint was all-cause mortality at the longest follow-up. Secondary endpoints included myocardial infarction (MI), repeat revascularization, and major adverse cardiac events (MACE).
RESULTS: From 836 initial citations, 7 randomized trials, and 23 observational studies with 44,256 patients (8,087 preventive and 36,169 culprit-only) were included in this study. Preventive PCI was associated with a significant reduction in repeat revascularization (odds ratios [OR]: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.51–0.99) with no differences in all-cause mortality (OR: 0.99; 95% CI: 0.76–1.29) or MI (OR: 1.08; 95% CI: 0.62–1.87) as compared with culprit-only PCI.Comparison of preventive PCI to the culprit-only PCI group revealed OR for MACE of 0.80 (95% CI: 0.57–1.12).Stratified analysis according to revascularization strategy demonstrated a significant survival benefit of culprit-only PCI over multivessel PCI during the index procedure and a significantly lower incidence of all-cause mortality with staged PCI as compared with culprit-only or multivessel PCI during the index procedure.
CONCLUSIONS: Preventive PCI strategy appears to be effective in reducing the risk of repeat revascularization without significant benefits for mortality or MI when compared with culprit-only revascularization in STEMI patients with multivessel disease.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25689544     DOI: 10.1111/joic.12167

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Interv Cardiol        ISSN: 0896-4327            Impact factor:   2.279


  4 in total

1.  Revascularization strategies in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel coronary artery disease: urgent or staged?

Authors:  Héctor Cubero-Gallego; Rafael Romaguera; Albert Ariza-Sole; Joan Antoni Gómez-Hospital; Angel Cequier
Journal:  Cardiovasc Diagn Ther       Date:  2017-06

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.  Revascularization Strategies in STEMI with Multivessel Disease: Deciding on Culprit Versus Complete-Ad Hoc or Staged.

Authors:  Shalin Patel; Steven R Bailey
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2017-08-24       Impact factor: 2.931

Review 4.  Impact of Incomplete Percutaneous Revascularization in Patients With Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Vinayak Nagaraja; Sze-Yuan Ooi; James Nolan; Adrian Large; Mark De Belder; Peter Ludman; Rodrigo Bagur; Nick Curzen; Takashi Matsukage; Fuminobu Yoshimachi; Chun Shing Kwok; Colin Berry; Mamas A Mamas
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2016-12-16       Impact factor: 5.501

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.