CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Scientific Library

Abstract

Recommended Article

Culprit versus multivessel coronary intervention in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis of randomized trials Incidence and prognostic implication of unrecognized myocardial scar characterized by cardiac magnetic resonance in diabetic patients without clinical evidence of myocardial infarction Uncovered Culprit Plaque Ruptures in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Assessed by Optical Coherence Tomography and Intravascular Ultrasound With iMap Effect of Aspirin on All-Cause Mortality in the Healthy Elderly An open-Label, 2 × 2 factorial, randomized controlled trial to evaluate the safety of apixaban vs. vitamin K antagonist and aspirin vs. placebo in patients with atrial fibrillation and acute coronary syndrome and/or percutaneous coronary intervention: Rationale and design of the AUGUSTUS trial Characterization of the Average Daily Ischemic and Bleeding Risk After Primary PCI for STEMI Optical coherence tomography predictors of target vessel myocardial infarction after provisional stenting in patients with coronary bifurcation disease Optical coherence tomography is a kid on the block: I would choose intravascular ultrasound
|<<... 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 ...>>|

Review Article2018 Mar;29(2):151-160.

JOURNAL：Coron Artery Dis. Article Link

Culprit versus multivessel coronary intervention in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis of randomized trials

Vaidya SR1, Qamar A, Arora S et al. Keywords: Acute Coronary Syndromes; Myocardial Infarction; Coronary Heart Disease

201803

BACKGROUND - The 2015 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association update on primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) recommended PCI of the non-infarct-related artery at the time of primary PCI (class IIb recommendation). Despite evidence supporting complete revascularization in STEMI, its benefit on mortality rates is uncertain.


METHODS - We searched all available databases for randomized controlled trials comparing complete multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention (CMV PCI) with infarct-artery-only revascularization in patients with STEMI. Summary risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for both the efficacy and safety outcomes.

RESULTS - Nine randomized controlled trials fulfilled the inclusion criteria, yielding 2991 patients. Follow-up periods ranged from 6 to 36 months. Compared with infarct-related artery-only PCI, CMV PCI was associated with significantly lower rates of major adverse cardiac events [relative risk (RR)=0.54, 95% CI=0.41-0.71; P<0.00001], cardiovascular mortality (RR=0.48, 95% CI=0.28-0.80; P=0.005), and repeat revascularization (RR=0.38, 95% CI=0.30-0.47; P<0.00001). Although, contrast-induced nephropathy and major bleed rates were comparable between both groups, CMV PCI failed to show any reduction in all-cause mortality (RR=0.75, 95% CI=0.53-1.07; P=0.11) and nonfatal myocardial infarction (RR=0.69, 95% CI=0.43-1.10; P=0.12).

CONCLUSION - Our results suggest that in patients with STEMI and multivessel disease, complete revascularization is safe, and is associated with reduced risks of major adverse cardiac events and cardiac death along with a reduced need for repeat revascularization. However, it showed no beneficial effect on all-cause mortality and nonfatal myocardial infarction.
>CBS CBS 2019

> CBS 2019 REGISTRATION

> CBS 2019 PROGRAM

> CBS 2019 CALL FOR SCIENCE

> CBS 2019 SPOTLIGHTS

 CBSMD

> CBSMD WEBSITE REGISTRATION

> EDUCATION CENTER

> RECOMMANDED PAPER

> TOP 10 RESEARCH PAPER

> PRE-READING

CBS 2019 CBS 2019 FACULTY Education Resource CBSMD Scientific Library
Copyright ⓒ CBS MD Nanjing China. All rights reserved. 京ICP备16025898号-11
联系我们| Top