Culprit vessel only versus complete revascularisation in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction - Should we stay or stage?

2Citations
Citations of this article
24Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Multivessel coronary artery disease (MVCAD) is common in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), thereby negatively affecting mortality and outcome. Currently there is increasing evidence that complete revascularisation should be considered in haemodynamically stable patients. There are few larger randomised controlled trials available showing a lower risk of major adverse cardiac events after complete revascularisation, mainly driven by a reduction of repeat revascularisation. However, these trials are not adequately powered to show a mortality benefit or reduced risk of myocardial infarction. As there are several possible strategies, the presence of MVCAD often poses a therapeutic dilemma for interventional cardiologists and there is still ongoing debate on when and how to perform complete revascularisation. Pending further trials that may clarify which strategy is best, an individualised approach should be adopted.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Hasun, M., & Weidinger, F. (2018). Culprit vessel only versus complete revascularisation in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction - Should we stay or stage? Interventional Cardiology: Reviews, Research, Resources, 13(3), 129–134. https://doi.org/10.15420/icr.2018.13.2

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