CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Acute Coronary Syndrom

Abstract

Recommended Article

MR-proADM as a Prognostic Marker in Patients With ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction-DANAMI-3 (a Danish Study of Optimal Acute Treatment of Patients With STEMI) Substudy Recommendations for Institutions Transitioning to High-Sensitivity Troponin Testing JACC Scientific Expert Panel Efficacy and Safety of Stents in ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Prognostic and Practical Validation of Current Definitions of Myocardial Infarction Associated With Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Canadian SCAD Cohort Study: Shedding Light on SCAD From a United Front Invasive Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association Mild Hypothermia in Cardiogenic Shock Complicating Myocardial Infarction - The Randomized SHOCK-COOL Trial Improved outcomes in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction during the last 20 years are related to implementation of evidence-based treatments: experiences from the SWEDEHEART registry 1995-2014
|<<... 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 ...>>|

Review Article2018 Mar;29(2):151-160.

JOURNAL：Coron Artery Dis. Article Link

Culprit versus multivessel coronary intervention in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis of randomized trials

Vaidya SR1, Qamar A, Arora S et al. Keywords: Acute Coronary Syndromes; Myocardial Infarction; Coronary Heart Disease

201803

BACKGROUND - The 2015 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association update on primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) recommended PCI of the non-infarct-related artery at the time of primary PCI (class IIb recommendation). Despite evidence supporting complete revascularization in STEMI, its benefit on mortality rates is uncertain.


METHODS - We searched all available databases for randomized controlled trials comparing complete multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention (CMV PCI) with infarct-artery-only revascularization in patients with STEMI. Summary risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for both the efficacy and safety outcomes.

RESULTS - Nine randomized controlled trials fulfilled the inclusion criteria, yielding 2991 patients. Follow-up periods ranged from 6 to 36 months. Compared with infarct-related artery-only PCI, CMV PCI was associated with significantly lower rates of major adverse cardiac events [relative risk (RR)=0.54, 95% CI=0.41-0.71; P<0.00001], cardiovascular mortality (RR=0.48, 95% CI=0.28-0.80; P=0.005), and repeat revascularization (RR=0.38, 95% CI=0.30-0.47; P<0.00001). Although, contrast-induced nephropathy and major bleed rates were comparable between both groups, CMV PCI failed to show any reduction in all-cause mortality (RR=0.75, 95% CI=0.53-1.07; P=0.11) and nonfatal myocardial infarction (RR=0.69, 95% CI=0.43-1.10; P=0.12).

CONCLUSION - Our results suggest that in patients with STEMI and multivessel disease, complete revascularization is safe, and is associated with reduced risks of major adverse cardiac events and cardiac death along with a reduced need for repeat revascularization. However, it showed no beneficial effect on all-cause mortality and nonfatal myocardial infarction.
>CBS CBS 2019

> CBS 2019 REGISTRATION

> CBS 2019 PROGRAM

> CBS 2019 CALL FOR SCIENCE

> CBS 2019 SPOTLIGHTS

 CBSMD

> CBSMD WEBSITE REGISTRATION

> EDUCATION CENTER

> RECOMMANDED PAPER

> TOP 10 RESEARCH PAPER

> PRE-READING

CBS 2019 CBS 2019 FACULTY Education Resource CBSMD Scientific Library
Copyright ⓒ CBS MD Nanjing China. All rights reserved. 京ICP备16025898号-11
联系我们| Top