CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

The sinus venosus contributes to coronary vasculature through VEGFC-stimulated angiogenesis Intravascular ultrasound-guided unprotected left main coronary artery stenting in the elderly Determinants and Impact of Heart Failure Readmission Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Impact of Incomplete Coronary Revascularization on Late Ischemic and Bleeding Events after Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement 2019 Guidelines on Diabetes, Pre-Diabetes and Cardiovascular Diseases developed in collaboration with the EASD ESC Clinical Practice Guidelines Left Main Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Patients With Prior Cerebrovascular Disease: Results From the EXCEL Trial Frailty in Older Adults Undergoing Aortic Valve Replacement: The FRAILTY-AVR Study Comparative effectiveness analysis of percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with chronic kidney disease and unprotected left main coronary artery disease Associations between Blood Lead Levels and Coronary Artery Stenosis Measured Using Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography Adenosine and adenosine receptor-mediated action in coronary microcirculation

Clinical Trial2019 Sep 1. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1907775.

JOURNAL:N Engl J Med. Article Link

Complete Revascularization with Multivessel PCI for Myocardial Infarction

Mehta SR, Wood DA, COMPLETE Trial Steering Committee and Investigators. Keywords: STEMI and multivessel coronary artery disease; complete vs culprit-lesion PCI; 3 years; superiority

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND - In patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of the culprit lesion reduces the risk of cardiovascular death or myocardial infarction. Whether PCI of nonculprit lesions further reduces the risk of such events is unclear.

 

METHODS - We randomly assigned patients with STEMI and multivessel coronary artery disease who had undergone successful culprit-lesion PCI to a strategy of either complete revascularization with PCI of angiographically significant nonculprit lesions or no further revascularization. Randomization was stratified according to the intended timing of nonculprit-lesion PCI (either during or after the index hospitalization). The first coprimary outcome was the composite of cardiovascular death or myocardial infarction; the second coprimary outcome was the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven revascularization.

 

RESULTS - At a median follow-up of 3 years, the first coprimary outcome had occurred in 158 of the 2016 patients (7.8%) in the complete-revascularization group as compared with 213 of the 2025 patients (10.5%) in the culprit-lesion-only PCI group (hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.60 to 0.91; P=0.004). The second coprimary outcome had occurred in 179 patients (8.9%) in the complete-revascularization group as compared with 339 patients (16.7%) in the culprit-lesion-only PCI group (hazard ratio, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.61; P<0.001). For both coprimary outcomes, the benefit of complete revascularization was consistently observed regardless of the intended timing of nonculprit-lesion PCI (P=0.62 and P=0.27 for interaction for the first and second coprimary outcomes, respectively).

 

CONCLUSIONS - Among patients with STEMI and multivessel coronary artery disease, complete revascularization was superior to culprit-lesion-only PCI in reducing the risk of cardiovascular death or myocardial infarction, as well as the risk of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven revascularization. (Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and others; COMPLETE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01740479)