Mariusz Gąsior1, Piotr Desperak1, Dariusz Dudek2, Adam Witkowski3, Paweł E Buszman4, Przemysław Trzeciak1, Michał Hawranek1, Marek Gierlotka5, Stanisław Bartuś2, Marek Grygier6, Michał Zembala7, Janina Stępińska8, Jacek Legutko9, Wojciech Wojakowski10. 1. Third Department of Cardiology, Faculty of Medical Sciences in Zabrze, Medical University of Silesia, 40-752 Katowice, Poland. 2. Department of Cardiology, University Hospital, Institute of Cardiology, Faculty of Medicine, Jagiellonian University Medical College, 31-007 Krakow, Poland. 3. Department of Interventional Cardiology and Angiology, National Institute of Cardiology, 04-628 Warsaw, Poland. 4. Department of Epidemiology and Statistics, Medical School of Silesia, 40-752 Katowice, Poland. 5. Department of Cardiology, Institute of Medical Sciences, University Hospital, University of Opole, 45-060 Opole, Poland. 6. First Department of Cardiology, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, 61-701 Poznan, Poland. 7. Department of Cardiac Surgery, Heart and Lung Transplantation and Mechanical Circulatory Support, Silesian Center for Heart Diseases, 41-800 Zabrze, Poland. 8. Department of Intensive Cardiac Therapy, National Institute of Cardiology, 04-628 Warsaw, Poland. 9. Department of Interventional Cardiology, John Paul II Hospital, Institute of Cardiology, Faculty of Medicine, Jagiellonian University Medical College, 31-007 Krakow, Poland. 10. Department of Cardiology and Structural Heart Diseases, Medical University of Silesia, 40-752 Katowice, Poland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was a comparison of culprit-lesion-only (CL-PCI) with the multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention (MV-PCI) in terms of 30-day and 12-month mortality in a national registry. METHODS: Patients from the PL-ACS registry with MI and CS were analyzed. Patients meeting the criteria of the CULPRIT-SHOCK trial were divided into two groups: CL-PCI and MV-PCI groups. RESULTS: Of the 3265 patients in the PL-ACS registry with MI complicated by CS, the criteria of the CULPRIT-SHOCK trial were met by 2084 patients (63.8%). The CL-PCI was performed in 883 patients, and MV-PCI was performed in 1045 patients. After the propensity score matching analysis, 617 well-matched pairs were obtained. In a 30-day follow-up, death from any cause occurred in 49.3% in the CL-PCI group and 57.0% in the MV-PCI group (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.58-0.92, p = 0.0081). After 12 months, the rate of mortality was 62.5% in the CL-PCI group and 68.0% in the MV-PCI group (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.84-1.01, p = 0.066). CONCLUSIONS: The results confirm the validity of CULPRIT-SHOCK findings in a national registry and current guideline-recommended strategy of revascularization limited to the infarct-related artery.
BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was a comparison of culprit-lesion-only (CL-PCI) with the multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention (MV-PCI) in terms of 30-day and 12-month mortality in a national registry. METHODS:Patients from the PL-ACS registry with MI and CS were analyzed. Patients meeting the criteria of the CULPRIT-SHOCK trial were divided into two groups: CL-PCI and MV-PCI groups. RESULTS: Of the 3265 patients in the PL-ACS registry with MI complicated by CS, the criteria of the CULPRIT-SHOCK trial were met by 2084 patients (63.8%). The CL-PCI was performed in 883 patients, and MV-PCI was performed in 1045 patients. After the propensity score matching analysis, 617 well-matched pairs were obtained. In a 30-day follow-up, death from any cause occurred in 49.3% in the CL-PCI group and 57.0% in the MV-PCI group (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.58-0.92, p = 0.0081). After 12 months, the rate of mortality was 62.5% in the CL-PCI group and 68.0% in the MV-PCI group (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.84-1.01, p = 0.066). CONCLUSIONS: The results confirm the validity of CULPRIT-SHOCK findings in a national registry and current guideline-recommended strategy of revascularization limited to the infarct-related artery.
Authors: Przemysław Trzeciak; Marek Gierlotka; Mariusz Gąsior; Andrzej Lekston; Krzysztof Wilczek; Grzegorz Słonka; Zbigniew Kalarus; Marian Zembala; Bartosz Hudzik; Lech Poloński Journal: Int J Cardiol Date: 2011-11-15 Impact factor: 4.164
Authors: Matthew A Cavender; Sarah Milford-Beland; Matthew T Roe; Eric D Peterson; William S Weintraub; Sunil V Rao Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2009-06-18 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Keith A A Fox; Omar H Dabbous; Robert J Goldberg; Karen S Pieper; Kim A Eagle; Frans Van de Werf; Alvaro Avezum; Shaun G Goodman; Marcus D Flather; Frederick A Anderson; Christopher B Granger Journal: BMJ Date: 2006-10-10
Authors: S C Wong; T Sanborn; L A Sleeper; J G Webb; R Pilchik; D Hart; S Mejnartowicz; T A Antonelli; R Lange; J K French; G Bergman; T LeJemtel; J S Hochman Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2000-09 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Timm Bauer; Uwe Zeymer; Matthias Hochadel; Helge Möllmann; Franz Weidinger; Ralf Zahn; Holger M Nef; Christian W Hamm; Jean Marco; Anselm K Gitt Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2012-01-09 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Mariusz Gąsior; Damian Pres; Wojciech Wojakowski; Paweł Buszman; Zbigniew Kalarus; Michał Hawranek; Marek Gierlotka; Andrzej Lekston; Katarzyna Mizia-Stec; Marian Zembala; Lech Poloński; Michał Tendera Journal: Pol Arch Med Wewn Date: 2016-09-20