CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Best Practices for the Prevention of Radial Artery Occlusion After Transradial Diagnostic Angiography and Intervention An International Consensus Paper Ejection Fraction Pros and Cons: JACC State-of-the-Art Review Large-Bore Radial Access for Complex PCI: A Flash of COLOR With Some Shades of Grey Relation of prior statin and anti-hypertensive use to severity of disease among patients hospitalized with COVID-19: Findings from the American Heart Association’s COVID-19 Cardiovascular Disease Registry Open sesame technique in percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction Myocardial Infarction Risk Stratification With a Single Measurement of High-Sensitivity Troponin I Validation of High-Risk Features for Stent-Related Ischemic Events as Endorsed by the 2017 DAPT Guidelines Invasive Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association Coronary Angiography after Cardiac Arrest without ST-Segment Elevation Shock Team Approach in Refractory Cardiogenic Shock Requiring Short-Term Mechanical Circulatory Support: A Proof of Concept

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)