Multi-vessel versus culprit-vessel and staged percutaneous coronary intervention in STEMI patients with multivessel disease: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

19Citations
Citations of this article
36Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

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.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

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.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free