Literature DB >> 29146672

Culprit Vessel-Only Versus Multivessel Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock Complicating ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Collaborative Meta-Analysis.

Dhaval Kolte1, Partha Sardar1, Sahil Khera1, Uwe Zeymer1, Holger Thiele1, Matthias Hochadel1, Dragana Radovanovic1, Paul Erne1, Kristina Hambraeus1, Stefan James1, Bimmer E Claessen1, Jose P S Henriques1, Darren Mylotte1, Philippe Garot1, Wilbert S Aronow1, Theophilus Owan1, Diwakar Jain1, Julio A Panza1, William H Frishman1, Gregg C Fonarow1, Deepak L Bhatt1, Herbert D Aronow1, J Dawn Abbott2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The optimal revascularization strategy in patients with multivessel disease presenting with cardiogenic shock complicating ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction remains unknown. METHODS AND
RESULTS: Databases were searched from 1999 to October 2016. Studies comparing immediate/single-stage multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention (MV-PCI) versus culprit vessel-only PCI (CO-PCI) in patients with multivessel disease, ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, and cardiogenic shock were included. Primary end point was short-term (in-hospital or 30 days) mortality. Secondary end points included long-term mortality, cardiovascular death, reinfarction, and repeat revascularization. Safety end points were in-hospital stroke, renal failure, and major bleeding. The meta-analysis included 11 nonrandomized studies and 5850 patients (1157 MV-PCI and 4693 CO-PCI). There was no significant difference in short-term mortality with MV-PCI versus CO-PCI (odds ratio [OR], 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81-1.43; P=0.61). Similarly, there were no significant differences in long-term mortality (OR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.54-1.30; P=0.43), cardiovascular death (OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.42-1.23; P=0.23), reinfarction (OR, 1.65; 95% CI, 0.84-3.26; P=0.15), or repeat revascularization (OR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.76-1.69; P=0.54) between the 2 groups. There was a nonsignificant trend toward higher in-hospital stroke (OR, 1.64; 95% CI, 0.98-2.72; P=0.06) and renal failure (OR, 1.30; 95% CI, 0.98-1.72; P=0.06), with no difference in major bleeding (OR, 1.47; 95% CI, 0.39-5.63; P=0.57) with MV-PCI when compared with CO-PCI.
CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis of nonrandomized studies suggests that in patients with cardiogenic shock complicating ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, there may be no significant benefit with single-stage MV-PCI compared with CO-PCI. Given the limitations of observational data, randomized trials are needed to determine the role of MV-PCI in this setting.
© 2017 American Heart Association, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cardiogenic shock; complete revascularization; mortality; myocardial infarction; percutaneous coronary intervention; stroke

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29146672     DOI: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.117.005582

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Interv        ISSN: 1941-7640            Impact factor:   6.546


  8 in total

Review 1.  Causes and predictors of readmission after transcatheter aortic valve implantation : A meta-analysis and systematic review.

Authors:  Yi-Ming Li; Fu-Yang Mei; Yi-Jun Yao; Jia-Yu Tsauo; Yong Peng; Mao Chen
Journal:  Herz       Date:  2019-12-05       Impact factor: 1.443

Review 2.  Therapeutic Advances in the Management of Cardiogenic Shock.

Authors:  Ovidiu Chioncel; Sean P Collins; Andrew P Ambrosy; Peter S Pang; Razvan I Radu; Elena-Laura Antohi; Josep Masip; Javed Butler; Vlad Anton Iliescu
Journal:  Am J Ther       Date:  2019 Mar/Apr       Impact factor: 2.688

Review 3.  Management of cardiogenic shock complicating myocardial infarction.

Authors:  Alexandre Mebazaa; Alain Combes; Sean van Diepen; Alexa Hollinger; Jaon N Katz; Giovanni Landoni; Ludhmila Abrahao Hajjar; Johan Lassus; Guillaume Lebreton; Gilles Montalescot; Jin Joo Park; Susanna Price; Alessandro Sionis; Demetris Yannopolos; Veli-Pekka Harjola; Bruno Levy; Holger Thiele
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2018-05-16       Impact factor: 17.440

4.  Effects of complete revascularization on long-term treatment outcomes in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease over 80 years of age admitted for acute coronary syndrome.

Authors:  Kirill Berezhnoi; Leonid Kokov; Alexandr Vanyukov
Journal:  Cardiovasc Diagn Ther       Date:  2019-08

Review 5.  Management of ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction in High-Risk Settings.

Authors:  Mohamed A Omer; Jose E Exaire; Jacob C Jentzer; Yader B Sandoval; Mandeep Singh; Charles R Cagin; Islam Y Elgendy; Tahir Tak
Journal:  Int J Angiol       Date:  2021-02-12

6.  One-Year Clinical Outcomes between Single- versus Multi-Staged PCI for ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction with Multi-Vessel Coronary Artery Disease: from Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry-National Institute of Health (KAMIR-NIH).

Authors:  Kye Taek Ahn; Jin Kyung Oh; Seok Woo Seong; Seon Ah Jin; Jae Hwan Lee; Si Wan Choi; Myung Ho Jeong; Shung Chull Chae; Young Jo Kim; Chong Jin Kim; Hyo Soo Kim; Myeong Chan Cho; Hyeon Cheol Gwon; Jin Ok Jeong; In Whan Seong
Journal:  Korean Circ J       Date:  2020-03       Impact factor: 3.243

7.  Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the management of nonculprit lesions in patients presenting with ST-elevation myocardial infarction: Outcomes from the pan-London heart attack centers.

Authors:  Ozan M Demir; Callum D Little; Richard Jabbour; Haseeb Rahman; Max Sayers; Asrar Ahmed; Michelle J Connolly; Ritesh Kanyal; Philip MacCarthy; Simon J Wilson; Miles Dalby; Ajay Jain; Iqbal Malik; Roby Rakhit; Divaka Perera
Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2021-12-30       Impact factor: 2.585

8.  Multivessel vs. Culprit Vessel-Only Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Bingquan Xiong; Huiping Yang; Wenlong Yu; Yunjie Zeng; Yue Han; Qiang She
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2022-04-15
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.