CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Acute Coronary Syndrom

Abstract

Recommended Article

Implications of Alternative Definitions of Peri-Procedural Myocardial Infarction After Coronary Revascularization Relation of Stature to Outcomes in Korean Patients Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Acute ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (from the INTERSTELLAR Registry) Stent Thrombosis Risk Over Time on the Basis of Clinical Presentation and Platelet Reactivity: Analysis From ADAPT-DES Late Survival Benefit of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Compared With Medical Therapy in Patients With Coronary Chronic Total Occlusion: A 10-Year Follow-Up Study Canadian Multicenter Chronic Total Occlusion Registry: Ten-Year Follow-Up Results of Chronic Total Occlusion Revascularization Association Between Haptoglobin Phenotype and Microvascular Obstruction in Patients With STEMI: A Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Study Prognostic Value of the Residual SYNTAX Score After Functionally Complete Revascularization in ACS Short Duration of DAPT Versus De-Escalation After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Acute Coronary Syndromes

Original Research2017 Oct;6(7):601-609.

JOURNAL:Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care. Article Link

Editor's Choice- Impact of immediate multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention versus culprit lesion intervention on 1-year outcome in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: Results of the randomised IABP-SHOCK II trial

Zeymer U, Werdan K, Thiele H et al. Keywords: multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention; cardiogenic shock; culprit artery; mortality; myocardial infarction; IABP-SHOCK II trial

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND - Current guidelines recommend immediate multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with cardiogenic shock, despite the lack of randomised trials. We sought to investigate the use and impact on outcome of multivessel PCI in comparison to culprit lesion only PCI in a retrospective analysis in patients with cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction.

 

METHODS AND RESULTS - In the randomised IABP-SHOCK II trial, investigating the effect of intra-aortic balloon pump on outcome, 451 (75%) of the total of 600 patients had multivessel coronary artery disease and underwent PCI. Immediate multivessel PCI was performed in 167 (37%) patients. TIMI 3 patency after PCI in all treated vessels was observed in 83.2% versus 79.0% of patients after multivessel versus culprit lesion PCI, respectively. The 30-day (44.9% vs. 42.3%) and 12-month (54.8% vs. 52.7%) mortality rates did not significantly differ between the two groups. In the multivariate analysis multivessel PCI was not associated with an improved mortality after 12 months (odds ratio 0.92, 95% confidence intervals 0.69-1.21).

 

CONCLUSION - In this retrospective analysis of the largest randomised study in cardiogenic shock immediate multivessel PCI was used in approximately one third of patients with cardiogenic shock. There was no benefit with immediate multivessel PCI in comparison to culprit lesion only PCI. Therefore a randomised trial is needed to determine the definitive role of multivessel PCI in cardiogenic shock.

 

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION - ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT00491036.