Single vs multivessel treatment during primary angioplasty: results of the multicentre randomised HEpacoat for cuLPrit or multivessel stenting for Acute Myocardial Infarction (HELP AMI) Study.

Abstract

Design: Prospective randomized, multicentre study.

Rationale: Recanalisation of the culprit lesion is the main goal of primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction. With the exception of cardiogenic shock, staged procedures are performed in the presence of multivessel disease. The study hypothesis is that with modern non-thrombogenic stents (heparin coated) complete revascularization with multivessel treatment can be safely achieved during the primary angioplasty procedure with a lower need of subsequent revascularization procedures and at a lower cost.

Endpoints: PRIMARY: 12-month incidence of repeat revascularization (any revascularization, infarct related artery as well as non-infarct-related artery). SECONDARY: (1) in hospital repeat revascularization, reinfarction and death; (2) total hospital cost (including a 12 months follow-up period).

Methods: 69 patients with ST elevation Acute Myocardial Infarction (AMI), <12 hours after symptoms onset, undergoing primary angioplasty, with documented multivessel disease and both culprit lesion and 1 to 3 other lesions suitable for stent implantation. Unbalanced randomization between culprit lesion treatment only (n = 17) and complete multivessel treatment (n = 52, with 71 additional lesions treated).

Results: The two groups were well balanced in terms of clinical characteristics, number of diseased vessels and angiographic characteristics of the culprit lesion. In the complete multivessel treatment group 2.36 +/- 0.64 lesions per patient were treated using 2.73 +/- 0.78 heparin coated stents (1.00 lesions and 1.29 +/- 0.61 stents in the culprit treatment group, both p < 0.001). The duration of the procedure increased from 53 +/- 21 min (culprit treatment group) to 69 +/- 32 min (p = 0.032) and the amount of contrast used from 242 +/- 102 ml (culprit treatment group) to 341 +/- 163 ml (multivessel complete treatment), p = 0.025. A similar low incidence of in-hospital major adverse cardiac events was observed in the 2 groups (0 and 3.8% in culprit and multivessel treatment groups, p = 0.164). The increase in the incidence of new revascularisation in the culprit treatment group at 12 month follow-up was not significant (35 vs 17%, p = 0.247) but was sufficient to compensate the initial higher in-hospital cost, with a similar 12 month hospital cost in the 2 groups (Euro 22,330 +/- Euro 13,653 vs Euro 20,382 +/- Euro 11,671, p = 0.231).

Conclusion: Multivessel treatment during primary PTCA was safe in this controlled trial. However, when only the culprit lesion was initially treated, the need for subsequent clinically driven revascularization remained low and no clinical or economical advantages were obtainable with a more aggressive initial approach. In clinical practice, a staged approach to multivessel treatment during primary angioplasty avoids to treat unnecessarily non clinically relevant lesions.