Timing of non-culprit revascularization in STEMI with multivessel disease: A contemporary meta-analysis of immediate and staged strategies.

IF 2.3 Q3 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Rubiya Ali, Muniba Naeem, Kamahl Harrisingh, Edgar Morales Arteaga, Holly Gaines, Jonathan S Roberts
{"title":"Timing of non-culprit revascularization in STEMI with multivessel disease: A contemporary meta-analysis of immediate and staged strategies.","authors":"Rubiya Ali, Muniba Naeem, Kamahl Harrisingh, Edgar Morales Arteaga, Holly Gaines, Jonathan S Roberts","doi":"10.1016/j.carrev.2026.08.009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Complete revascularization improves outcomes in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) with multivessel coronary artery disease, but the optimal timing of non-culprit intervention-immediate, early-staged (same hospitalization), or delayed (post-discharge)-remains uncertain.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the effect of timing of non-culprit revascularization in STEMI.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials comparing immediate, early-staged, and delayed-staged non-culprit revascularization in STEMI. DerSimonian-Laird random-effects models pooled risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI); fixed-effect and REML sensitivity analyses and parallel hard-endpoint (death plus myocardial infarction) analyses were performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five randomized trials contributed to the pooled timing comparisons. Versus early-staged revascularization, immediate complete PCI was not associated with improved outcomes (three trials; RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.92-1.70; I<sup>2</sup> = 0%). Versus delayed-staged strategies, immediate PCI showed a numerical event reduction (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.37-1.45) with substantial heterogeneity (I<sup>2</sup> ≈ 88%), driven by discordant results between MULTISTARS AMI and iMODERN, the latter a hybrid strategy-plus-timing (physiology- versus imaging-guided) rather than a pure timing comparison. Hard-endpoint analyses showed no significant difference; where reported, contrast-induced nephropathy and major bleeding did not differ.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Immediate complete revascularization showed no clear difference in outcomes versus staged revascularization during the same hospitalization; as most trials were not powered for non-inferiority, this should not be read as equivalence. These findings support an individualized approach emphasizing timely completion rather than routine immediate multivessel PCI in stable STEMI, with staged PCI favored when lesions are complex, renal function is impaired, or physiology-guided assessment is preferred.</p><p><strong>Condensed abstract: </strong>In this meta-analysis of direct-timing randomized trials, immediate multivessel PCI showed no benefit versus in-hospital staged revascularization and only inconsistent benefit versus delayed strategies. These data support immediate non-culprit PCI in the hemodynamically stable patient with a non-complex culprit intervention and anticipated non-complex non-culprit PCI, and staged in-hospital PCI as an equally pragmatic default, in stable STEMI with multivessel disease. Because the potential downside of brief post-discharge deferral (within 30-45 days) appears small, selected patients-such as those with significant acute kidney injury after index PCI or functionally vulnerable elderly patients who would benefit from earlier discharge-may reasonably undergo planned outpatient non-culprit revascularization.</p>","PeriodicalId":47657,"journal":{"name":"Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carrev.2026.08.009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Complete revascularization improves outcomes in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) with multivessel coronary artery disease, but the optimal timing of non-culprit intervention-immediate, early-staged (same hospitalization), or delayed (post-discharge)-remains uncertain.

Objectives: To evaluate the effect of timing of non-culprit revascularization in STEMI.

Methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials comparing immediate, early-staged, and delayed-staged non-culprit revascularization in STEMI. DerSimonian-Laird random-effects models pooled risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI); fixed-effect and REML sensitivity analyses and parallel hard-endpoint (death plus myocardial infarction) analyses were performed.

Results: Five randomized trials contributed to the pooled timing comparisons. Versus early-staged revascularization, immediate complete PCI was not associated with improved outcomes (three trials; RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.92-1.70; I2 = 0%). Versus delayed-staged strategies, immediate PCI showed a numerical event reduction (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.37-1.45) with substantial heterogeneity (I2 ≈ 88%), driven by discordant results between MULTISTARS AMI and iMODERN, the latter a hybrid strategy-plus-timing (physiology- versus imaging-guided) rather than a pure timing comparison. Hard-endpoint analyses showed no significant difference; where reported, contrast-induced nephropathy and major bleeding did not differ.

Conclusions: Immediate complete revascularization showed no clear difference in outcomes versus staged revascularization during the same hospitalization; as most trials were not powered for non-inferiority, this should not be read as equivalence. These findings support an individualized approach emphasizing timely completion rather than routine immediate multivessel PCI in stable STEMI, with staged PCI favored when lesions are complex, renal function is impaired, or physiology-guided assessment is preferred.

Condensed abstract: In this meta-analysis of direct-timing randomized trials, immediate multivessel PCI showed no benefit versus in-hospital staged revascularization and only inconsistent benefit versus delayed strategies. These data support immediate non-culprit PCI in the hemodynamically stable patient with a non-complex culprit intervention and anticipated non-complex non-culprit PCI, and staged in-hospital PCI as an equally pragmatic default, in stable STEMI with multivessel disease. Because the potential downside of brief post-discharge deferral (within 30-45 days) appears small, selected patients-such as those with significant acute kidney injury after index PCI or functionally vulnerable elderly patients who would benefit from earlier discharge-may reasonably undergo planned outpatient non-culprit revascularization.

STEMI合并多血管疾病的非元凶血运重建术时机:即时和分期策略的当代荟萃分析
背景:完全血运重建术可改善st段抬高型心肌梗死(STEMI)合并多支冠状动脉疾病的预后,但非罪魁祸首干预的最佳时机——立即、早期(同一住院时间)或延迟(出院后)——仍不确定。目的:探讨STEMI非元凶血管重建术时机的影响。方法:我们对随机试验进行了系统回顾和荟萃分析,比较STEMI患者的即时、早期和延迟阶段非元凶血运重建术。dersimonan - laird随机效应模型将风险比(RR)合并为95%置信区间(CI);进行固定效应和REML敏感性分析以及平行硬终点(死亡加心肌梗死)分析。结果:五项随机试验有助于合并时间比较。与早期血运重建术相比,立即完全PCI与改善预后无关(3项试验;RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.92-1.70; I2 = 0%)。与延迟分期策略相比,立即PCI显示数字事件减少(RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.37-1.45),具有很大的异质性(I2≈88%),这是由MULTISTARS AMI和iMODERN之间的不一致结果驱动的,后者是混合策略加定时(生理与成像引导),而不是纯粹的定时比较。硬终点分析显示无显著差异;造影剂引起的肾病和大出血在报告中没有差异。结论:在同一住院期间,立即完全血运重建术与分期血运重建术的结果无明显差异;由于大多数试验没有证明非劣效性,因此不应将其解读为等效性。这些发现支持个体化治疗方法,强调及时完成治疗,而不是常规的即时多血管PCI治疗,当病变复杂、肾功能受损或生理指导评估时,分期PCI治疗更受欢迎。摘要:在这项直接定时随机试验的荟萃分析中,立即多血管PCI与院内分期血运重建术相比没有益处,只有与延迟策略不一致的益处。这些数据支持在血流动力学稳定的患者中采用非复杂的罪魁祸首干预和预期的非复杂的非罪魁祸首PCI,以及在稳定的STEMI合并多血管疾病中分期住院PCI作为同样实用的默认方案。由于短暂的出院后延迟(30-45天)的潜在不利因素似乎很小,因此选择的患者-例如PCI术后严重急性肾损伤的患者或功能脆弱的老年患者,他们可以从早期出院中受益-可以合理地进行计划的门诊非罪魁祸首血运重建术。
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
Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine
Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
5.90%
发文量
687
审稿时长
36 days
期刊介绍: Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine (CRM) is an international and multidisciplinary journal that publishes original laboratory and clinical investigations related to revascularization therapies in cardiovascular medicine. Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine publishes articles related to preclinical work and molecular interventions, including angiogenesis, cell therapy, pharmacological interventions, restenosis management, and prevention, including experiments conducted in human subjects, in laboratory animals, and in vitro. Specific areas of interest include percutaneous angioplasty in coronary and peripheral arteries, intervention in structural heart disease, cardiovascular surgery, etc.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书