Timing of multivessel revascularization in stable patients with STEMI: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

IF 7.2 2区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Felix Voll, Constantin Kuna, Maria Scalamogna, Thorsten Kessler, Sebastian Kufner, Tobias Rheude, Hendrik B Sager, Erion Xhepa, Jens Wiebe, Michael Joner, Robert A Byrne, Heribert Schunkert, Gjin Ndrepepa, Barbara E Stähli, Adnan Kastrati, Salvatore Cassese
{"title":"Timing of multivessel revascularization in stable patients with STEMI: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.","authors":"Felix Voll, Constantin Kuna, Maria Scalamogna, Thorsten Kessler, Sebastian Kufner, Tobias Rheude, Hendrik B Sager, Erion Xhepa, Jens Wiebe, Michael Joner, Robert A Byrne, Heribert Schunkert, Gjin Ndrepepa, Barbara E Stähli, Adnan Kastrati, Salvatore Cassese","doi":"10.1016/j.rec.2024.06.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction and objectives: </strong>Multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention (MV-PCI) is recommended in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) without cardiogenic shock. The present network meta-analysis investigated the optimal timing of MV-PCI in this context.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We pooled the aggregated data from randomized trials investigating stable STEMI patients with multivessel CAD treated with a strategy of either MV-PCI or culprit vessel-only PCI. The primary outcome was all-cause death. The main secondary outcomes were cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and unplanned ischemia-driven revascularization.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 11 trials, a total of 10 507 patients were randomly assigned to MV-PCI (same sitting, n=1683; staged during the index hospitalization, n=3460; staged during a subsequent hospitalization within 45 days, n=3275) or to culprit vessel-only PCI (n=2089). The median follow-up was 18.6 months. In comparison with culprit vessel-only PCI, MV-PCI staged during the index hospitalization significantly reduced all-cause death (risk ratio, 0.73; 95%CI, 0.56-0.92; P=.008) and ranked as possibly the best treatment option for this outcome compared with all other strategies. In comparison with culprit vessel-only PCI, a MV-PCI reduced cardiovascular mortality without differences dependent on the timing of revascularization. MV-PCI within the index hospitalization, either in a single procedure or staged, significantly reduced myocardial infarction and unplanned ischemia-driven revascularization, with no significant difference between each other.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In patients with STEMI and multivessel CAD without cardiogenic shock, multivessel PCI within the index hospitalization, either in a single procedure or staged, represents the safest and most efficacious approach. The different timings of multivessel PCI did not result in any significant differences in all-cause death. This study is registered at PROSPERO (CRD42023457794).</p>","PeriodicalId":38430,"journal":{"name":"Revista española de cardiología (English ed.)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":7.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista española de cardiología (English ed.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rec.2024.06.002","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction and objectives: Multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention (MV-PCI) is recommended in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) without cardiogenic shock. The present network meta-analysis investigated the optimal timing of MV-PCI in this context.

Methods: We pooled the aggregated data from randomized trials investigating stable STEMI patients with multivessel CAD treated with a strategy of either MV-PCI or culprit vessel-only PCI. The primary outcome was all-cause death. The main secondary outcomes were cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and unplanned ischemia-driven revascularization.

Results: Among 11 trials, a total of 10 507 patients were randomly assigned to MV-PCI (same sitting, n=1683; staged during the index hospitalization, n=3460; staged during a subsequent hospitalization within 45 days, n=3275) or to culprit vessel-only PCI (n=2089). The median follow-up was 18.6 months. In comparison with culprit vessel-only PCI, MV-PCI staged during the index hospitalization significantly reduced all-cause death (risk ratio, 0.73; 95%CI, 0.56-0.92; P=.008) and ranked as possibly the best treatment option for this outcome compared with all other strategies. In comparison with culprit vessel-only PCI, a MV-PCI reduced cardiovascular mortality without differences dependent on the timing of revascularization. MV-PCI within the index hospitalization, either in a single procedure or staged, significantly reduced myocardial infarction and unplanned ischemia-driven revascularization, with no significant difference between each other.

Conclusions: In patients with STEMI and multivessel CAD without cardiogenic shock, multivessel PCI within the index hospitalization, either in a single procedure or staged, represents the safest and most efficacious approach. The different timings of multivessel PCI did not result in any significant differences in all-cause death. This study is registered at PROSPERO (CRD42023457794).

STEMI 稳定期患者进行多血管血运重建的时机:系统综述和网络荟萃分析。
导言和目标:建议ST段抬高型心肌梗死(STEMI)和多支血管冠状动脉疾病(CAD)且无心源性休克的患者接受多支血管经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(MV-PCI)。本网络荟萃分析研究了在这种情况下 MV-PCI 的最佳时机:我们汇集了研究稳定型 STEMI 患者的随机试验数据,这些试验采用了 MV-PCI 或仅对罪魁祸首血管进行 PCI 治疗的策略。主要结果为全因死亡。主要次要结局为心血管死亡、心肌梗死和计划外缺血驱动的血管再通。该研究已在 PROSPERO(CRD42023457794)上注册:结果:在11项试验中,共有10 507名患者被随机分配到MV-PCI(同一坐位,n = 1683;在指数住院期间分期,n = 3460;在45天内的后续住院期间分期,n = 3275)或单纯罪魁祸首血管PCI(n = 2089)。中位随访时间为 18.6 个月。与单纯死因血管 PCI 相比,在指数住院期间分期的 MV-PCI 显著降低了全因死亡(风险比为 0.73;95%CI 为 0.56-0.92;P = .008),与所有其他策略相比,可能是针对这一结果的最佳治疗方案。与仅对罪魁祸首血管进行 PCI 相比,MV-PCI 可降低心血管死亡率,但与血管重建的时间无关。在指数住院期间进行MV-PCI,无论是单次手术还是分期手术,都能显著减少心肌梗死和计划外缺血导致的血管再通,但两者之间没有显著差异:对于 STEMI 和多支血管 CAD 且无心源性休克的患者,在指数住院期间进行多支血管 PCI(无论是单次手术还是分期手术)是最安全、最有效的方法。多血管PCI的不同时机并不会导致全因死亡的显著差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
219
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信