CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Acute Coronary Syndrom

Abstract

Recommended Article

Open sesame technique in percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction Optimal Timing of Intervention in NSTE-ACS Without Pre-Treatment The EARLY Randomized Trial Shock Team Approach in Refractory Cardiogenic Shock Requiring Short-Term Mechanical Circulatory Support: A Proof of Concept Long-Term Follow-Up of Complete Versus Lesion-Only Revascularization in STEMI and Multivessel Disease: The CvLPRIT Trial Mortality in STEMI patients without standard modifiable risk factors: a sex-disaggregated analysis of SWEDEHEART registry data Complete or Culprit-Only Revascularization for Patients With Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Pairwise and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials Canadian Multicenter Chronic Total Occlusion Registry: Ten-Year Follow-Up Results of Chronic Total Occlusion Revascularization Biolimus-A9 polymer-free coated stent in high bleeding risk patients with acute coronary syndrome: a Leaders Free ACS sub-study

Original Research2018 Feb 27;71(8):844-856.

JOURNAL:J Am Coll Cardiol. Article Link

Multivessel Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction With Cardiogenic Shock

Hahn JY, KAMIR Investigators et al. Keywords: ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction; cardiogenic shock; complete revascularization; multivessel disease; outcomes; percutaneous coronary intervention

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND - Recent trials demonstrated a benefit of multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for noninfarct-related artery (non-IRA) stenosis over IRA-only PCI in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) multivessel disease. However, evidence is limited in patients with cardiogenic shock.


OBJECTIVES - This study investigated the prognostic impact of multivessel PCI in patients with STEMI multivessel disease presenting with cardiogenic shock, using the nationwide, multicenter, prospective KAMIR-NIH (Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction-National Institutes of Health) registry.

METHODS - Among 13,104 consecutive patients enrolled in the KAMIR-NIH registry, we selected patients with STEMI with multivessel disease presenting with cardiogenic shock and who underwent primary PCI. Primary outcome was 1-year all-cause death, and secondary outcomes included patient-oriented composite outcome (a composite of all-cause death, any myocardial infarction, and any repeat revascularization) and its individual components.

RESULTS - A total of 659 patients were treated by multivessel PCI (n = 260) or IRA-only PCI (n = 399) strategy. The risk of all-cause death and non-IRA repeat revascularization was significantly lower in the multivessel PCI group than in the IRA-only PCI group (21.3% vs. 31.7%; hazard ratio: 0.59; 95% confidence interval: 0.43 to 0.82; p = 0.001; and 6.7% vs. 8.2%; hazard ratio: 0.39; 95% confidence interval: 0.17 to 0.90; p = 0.028, respectively). Results were consistent after multivariable regression, propensity-score matching, and inverse probability weighting to adjust for baseline differences. In a multivariable model, multivessel PCI was independently associated with reduced risk of 1-year all-cause death and patient-oriented composite outcome.

CONCLUSIONS - Of patients with STEMI and multivessel disease with cardiogenic shock, multivessel PCI was associated with a significantly lower risk of all-cause death and non-IRA repeat revascularization. Our data suggest that multivessel PCI for complete revascularization is a reasonable strategy to improve outcomes in patients with STEMI with cardiogenic shock.

Copyright © 2018 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.