Long-term outcomes of single-vessel percutaneous coronary intervention on culprit vessel vs. multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention in non-st-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome patients with multivessel coronary artery disease

Abstract

Background: The optimal percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) strategy for multivessel lesions in the setting of non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) remains controversial. This study sought to compare long-term prognosis between single-vessel PCI (SV-PCI) and multivessel PCI (MV-PCI) in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (MV-CAD) presenting with NSTE-ACS in a real-world population. Methods and Results: NSTE-ACS patients with MV-CAD undergoing PCI in Fuwai Hospital in 2013 were consecutively enrolled. SV-PCI was defined as targeting only the culprit vessel, whereas MV-PCI was defined as treating ≥1 coronary artery(s) in addition to the culprit vessel at the index procedure. The primary endpoint was the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) at 2 years, consisting of all-cause death, cardiac death, myocardial infarction, unplanned revascularization, or stroke. A total of 3,338 patients were included. Both SV-PCI and MV-PCI were performed in 2,259 patients and 1,079 patients, respectively. During a median follow up of 2.1 years, the MACCE rates and adjusted risk were not significantly different between the SV-PCI and MV-PCI groups (13.1% vs. 14.0%, P=0.735; adjusted HR=0.967, 95% CI: 0.792–1.180). Similar results were observed in propensity-score matching and inverse probability of treatment weighting analyses. Subgroup analysis revealed a consistent effect on 2-year MACCE across different subgroups. Conclusions: In NSTE-ACS patients with MV-CAD, MV-PCI is not superior to SV-PCI in terms of long-term MACCE.