Backgroundand Objective: Studies have highlighted the significant role of staged percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for a multivessel disease (MVD) among patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). However, the relative benefit of staged vs. culprit-only PCI for MVD in elderly patients with STEMI remains undetermined. Thus, the present study compared the clinical outcomes of staged and culprit-only PCI in this cohort.

Methods: From January 2014 to September 2019, 617 patients aged ≥65 years with STEMI and MVD who underwent primary PCI of the culprit vessels within 12 h of symptom onset were enrolled. They were then categorized into the staged and culprit-only PCI groups according to intervention strategy. Propensity score matching (PSM) was conducted to adjust for confounding factors between groups. The primary end point was major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), a composite of all-cause death, cardiac death, recurrent myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and ischemia-driven revascularization.

Results: During a mean follow-up of 56 months, 209 patients experienced MACCE and 119 died. Staged revascularization was associated with a lower risk of MACCE, all-cause death, and cardiac death than culprit-only PCI in both overall patients and the PSM cohorts. In contrast, there was no significant difference in stroke or ischemia-driven revascularization. Moreover, on multivariate Cox regression analysis, staged PCI was a significant predictor of a lower incidence of MACCE and all-cause death.

Conclusion: In elderly patients with STEMI and MVD, staged PCI is superior to culprit-only PCI.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9500352PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2022.943323DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

culprit-only pci
20
elderly patients
12
myocardial infarction
12
staged culprit-only
12
pci
9
staged
8
staged revascularization
8
percutaneous coronary
8
coronary intervention
8
multivessel disease
8

Similar Publications

Fractional flow reserve-guided complete revascularization versus culprit-only percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with myocardial infarction: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Cardiovasc Revasc Med

December 2024

Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Baystate Medical Center and Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Massachusetts-Baystate, Springfield, MA, USA. Electronic address: https://twitter.com/AGoldsweig.

Introduction: The optimal revascularization strategy for patients with myocardial infarction (MI) and multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) remains an area of research and debate. Fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided complete revascularization (CR) by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has emerged as an alternative to traditional culprit-only PCI.

Objective: To investigate the outcomes of FFR-guided CR versus culprit-only PCI in patients with MI and multivessel CAD.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF
Article Synopsis
  • The COMPLETE trial showed that complete revascularization in STEMI patients with multivessel disease leads to better health outcomes than treating only the culprit lesion.
  • This subanalysis focused on whether having a nonculprit lesion (NCL) in the proximal/mid left anterior descending artery (LAD) affects outcomes compared to NCLs in other locations.
  • Results indicated that while the presence of a proximal/mid-LAD NCL did not significantly alter treatment benefits, complete revascularization consistently reduced major cardiovascular events across both groups.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of complete revascularization (CR) versus culprit-only revascularization (COR) in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) have shifted the recommendation for CR from class III to class I in the AHA/ACC/SCAI guidelines, but it remains unclear if the benefit of CR over COR extends to older adults, who have greater bleeding risk, comorbidity burden, and complexity of lesions. We performed a meta-analysis to place the results of the previous RCTs in the context of the recently published FIRE trial and the subgroup analysis of the COMPLETE trial in adults ≥75 years old.

Methods: We searched the literature from inception to October 21, 2023.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Complete myocardial revascularization, targeting both culprit and non-culprit coronary stenoses, is recommended by current guidelines in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) management, either during the index percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) procedure or within 45 days, depending on the clinical context. However, in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), particularly end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), fractional flow reserve (FFR) presents unique challenges. Altered coronary physiology in CKD, such as arterial stiffness and microcirculatory dysfunction, affects FFR accuracy, complicating revascularization decisions.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Introduction: Recently, the FFR-Guidance for Complete Nonculprit Revascularization (FULL REVASC) trial in ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients with multiple vessel disease (MVD) did not show differences in the composite endpoint of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, or unplanned revascularization than culprit-lesion-only percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) at 4.8 years, although complete revascularization is a recommendation IA in current guidelines. We want to determine through an updated meta-analysis whether complete revascularization is associated with decreased mortality and hard clinical endpoints compared to culprit lesion only PCI.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!