Yongwhan Lim, Jaehyuk Jang, Seung Hun Lee, Joon Ho Ahn, Young Joon Hong, Youngkeun Ahn, Myung Ho Jeong, Chan Joon Kim, Joo-Yong Hahn, Joo Myung Lee, Keun Ho Park, Eun Ho Choo, Sung Gyun Ahn, Joon-Hyung Doh, Sang Yeub Lee, Sang Don Park, Hyun-Jong Lee, Min Gyu Kang, Yun-Kyeong Cho, Chang Wook Nam, Sung Hyun Bu, Min Chul Kim
{"title":"Staged versus immediate complete revascularization for non-culprit arteries in acute myocardial infarction: a post-hoc analysis of FRAME-AMI.","authors":"Yongwhan Lim, Jaehyuk Jang, Seung Hun Lee, Joon Ho Ahn, Young Joon Hong, Youngkeun Ahn, Myung Ho Jeong, Chan Joon Kim, Joo-Yong Hahn, Joo Myung Lee, Keun Ho Park, Eun Ho Choo, Sung Gyun Ahn, Joon-Hyung Doh, Sang Yeub Lee, Sang Don Park, Hyun-Jong Lee, Min Gyu Kang, Yun-Kyeong Cho, Chang Wook Nam, Sung Hyun Bu, Min Chul Kim","doi":"10.3389/fcvm.2024.1475483","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>The optimal timing for complete revascularization (CR) in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and multivessel disease (MVD) remain uncertain.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This post-hoc analysis of the FRAME-AMI trial included AMI patients with MVD (<i>n</i> = 549). They were classified into immediate (<i>n</i> = 329) and staged CR (<i>n</i> = 220) groups. All percutaneous coronary interventions were performed during inex hospitalization. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, acute myocardial infarction, and repeated revascularization. Secondary endpoints included each component of the primary endpoint. Additional comparisons for the outcomes in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-STEMI (NSTEMI) were also performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The incidence of the primary endpoint was not significantly different in any of the AMI patients [12.7% [immediate CR] vs. 17.4% [staged CR], <i>p</i> = 0.905, adjusted hazard ratio [HR] of staged CR = 0.81, 95% confidence interval = 0.43-1.53, <i>p</i> = 0.528]. Other secondary endpoints were also not significantly different. Analyses of STEMI and Neither the primary or secondary endpoints of NSTEMI patients were significantly different.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this post-hoc analysis of the FRAME-AMI trial, no significant difference in clinical outcomes was observed between the immediate and staged CR strategies for AMI with MVD and the subgroups, such as STEMI or NSTEMI. However, the results should be interpreted carefully because of the many limitations, including a limited sample size and a lack of statistical power. <b>Trial Registration:</b> FRAME-AMI clinicaltrials.gov, identifier (NCT02715518).</p>","PeriodicalId":12414,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine","volume":"11 ","pages":"1475483"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11669547/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2024.1475483","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background and objectives: The optimal timing for complete revascularization (CR) in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and multivessel disease (MVD) remain uncertain.
Methods: This post-hoc analysis of the FRAME-AMI trial included AMI patients with MVD (n = 549). They were classified into immediate (n = 329) and staged CR (n = 220) groups. All percutaneous coronary interventions were performed during inex hospitalization. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, acute myocardial infarction, and repeated revascularization. Secondary endpoints included each component of the primary endpoint. Additional comparisons for the outcomes in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-STEMI (NSTEMI) were also performed.
Results: The incidence of the primary endpoint was not significantly different in any of the AMI patients [12.7% [immediate CR] vs. 17.4% [staged CR], p = 0.905, adjusted hazard ratio [HR] of staged CR = 0.81, 95% confidence interval = 0.43-1.53, p = 0.528]. Other secondary endpoints were also not significantly different. Analyses of STEMI and Neither the primary or secondary endpoints of NSTEMI patients were significantly different.
Conclusions: In this post-hoc analysis of the FRAME-AMI trial, no significant difference in clinical outcomes was observed between the immediate and staged CR strategies for AMI with MVD and the subgroups, such as STEMI or NSTEMI. However, the results should be interpreted carefully because of the many limitations, including a limited sample size and a lack of statistical power. Trial Registration: FRAME-AMI clinicaltrials.gov, identifier (NCT02715518).
期刊介绍:
Frontiers? Which frontiers? Where exactly are the frontiers of cardiovascular medicine? And who should be defining these frontiers?
At Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine we believe it is worth being curious to foresee and explore beyond the current frontiers. In other words, we would like, through the articles published by our community journal Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine, to anticipate the future of cardiovascular medicine, and thus better prevent cardiovascular disorders and improve therapeutic options and outcomes of our patients.