Abstract
Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is preferred in patients with acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). In patients with acute STEMI with multivessel disease (MVD), the guidelines recommend culprit vessel PCI (CV-PCI) in the absence of hemodynamic instability. We performed a meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing multi-vessel PCI (MV-PCI) with CV-PCI or staged PCI (S-PCI) in patients with acute STEMI and MVD. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE and CENTRAL were searched for publications since inception to December 2013. Random effects model was used to compute summary effects. Results: Four RCTs (840 patients) were identified. MV-PCI compared to CV-PCI significantly reduced the risks of major adverse cardiac events (MACE)-a composite of MI, revascularization and all-cause mortality (RR: 0.46, 95% CI: 0.35-0.60, P.
Author supplied keywords
Cite
CITATION STYLE
Dahal, K., Rijal, J., Panta, R., Lee, J., Azrin, M., & Lootens, R. (2014). Multi-vessel versus culprit-vessel and staged percutaneous coronary intervention in STEMI patients with multivessel disease: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine, 15(8), 408–413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carrev.2014.10.007
Register to see more suggestions
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.