CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Acute Coronary Syndrom

Abstract

Recommended Article

Early versus delayed invasive intervention in acute coronary syndromes The Wait for High-Sensitivity Troponin Is Over—Proceed Cautiously Improvement of Clinical Outcome in Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Between 1999 And 2016 in China : The Prospective, Multicenter Registry MOODY Study Acute Myocardial Injury in Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19 Infection: A Review Another Nail in the Coffin for Intra-Aortic Balloon Counterpulsion in Acute Myocardial Infarction With Cardiogenic Shock Cardiac Shock Care Centers: JACC Review Topic of the Week OPTIMAL USE OF LIPID-LOWERING THERAPY AFTER ACUTE CORONARY SYNDROMES: A Position Paper endorsed by the International Lipid Expert Panel (ILEP) Ticagrelor or Prasugrel in Patients with ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Clinical TrialVolume 74, Issue 25, December 2019

JOURNAL:J Am Coll Cardiol. Article Link

Long-Term Follow-Up of Complete Versus Lesion-Only Revascularization in STEMI and Multivessel Disease: The CvLPRIT Trial

AH Gershlick, AS Banning, E Parker Keywords: complete revascularization; multivessel disease; myocardial infarction; noninfarct-related lesion; primary percutaneous coronary interventionST-elevation

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND - Randomized trials have shown that complete revascularization in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (MI) with multivessel disease results in lower major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (all-cause death, MI, ischemia-driven revascularization, heart failure).

 

OBJECTIVES- The goal of this study was to determine whether the benefits of complete revascularization are sustained long-term and their impact on hard endpoints.

 

METHODS - CvLPRIT (Complete versus Lesion-only Primary PCI Trial) was a randomized trial of complete inpatient revascularization versus infarct-related artery revascularization only at the index admission. Randomized patients have been followed longer-term. The components of the original primary endpoint were collected from physical and electronic patient records, and from local databases for all readmissions.

 

RESULTS- The median follow-up (achieved in >90% patients) from randomization to first event or last follow-up was 5.6 years (0.0 to 7.3 years). The primary MACE endpoint rate at this time point was 24.0% in the complete revascularization group but 37.7% of the infarct-related arteryonly group (hazard ratio: 0.57; 95% confidence interval: 0.37 to 0.87; p = 0.0079). The composite endpoint of all-cause death/MI was 10.0% in the complete revascularization group versus 18.5% in the infarct-related arteryonly group (hazard ratio: 0.47; 95% confidence interval: 0.25 to 0.89; p = 0.0175). In a landmark analysis (from 12 months to final follow-up), there was no significant difference between MACE, death/MI, and individual components of the primary endpoint.

 

CONCLUSIONS - Long-term follow-up of the CvLPRIT trial shows that the significantly lower rate of MACE in the complete revascularization group, previously seen at 12 months, is sustained to a median of 5.6 years. A significant difference in composite all-cause death/MI favoring the complete revascularization was also observed. (Complete versus Lesion-only Primary PCI Trial; ISRCTN70913605)