Detailed Information

Cited 0 time in webofscience Cited 0 time in scopus
Metadata Downloads

Meta-Analysis of Multivessel Coronary Artery Revascularization Versus Culprit-Only Revascularization in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction and Multivessel Disease

Authors
Bangalore, SripalKumar, SunilPoddar, Kanhaiya L.Ramasamy, SureshkumarRha, Seung-WoonFaxon, David P.
Issue Date
1-5월-2011
Publisher
EXCERPTA MEDICA INC-ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
Citation
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY, v.107, no.9, pp.1300 - 1310
Indexed
SCIE
SCOPUS
Journal Title
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY
Volume
107
Number
9
Start Page
1300
End Page
1310
URI
https://scholar.korea.ac.kr/handle/2021.sw.korea/112480
DOI
10.1016/j.amjcard.2010.12.039
ISSN
0002-9149
Abstract
American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines for management of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEW) recommend culprit artery-only revascularization (CULPRIT) based on safety concerns during noninfarct-related artery intervention. However, the data to support this safety concern are scant. Searches were performed in PubMed/EMBASE/CENTRAL for studies evaluating multivessel revascularization versus CULPRIT in patients with STEMI and multivessel disease (MVD). A multivessel revascularization strategy had to be performed at the time of CULPRIT or during the same hospitalization. Early (<= 30-day) and long-term outcomes were evaluated. Among 19 studies (23 arms) that evaluated 61,764 subjects with STEMI and MVD, multivessel revascularization was performed in a minority of patients (16%). For early outcomes, there was no significant difference for outcomes of mortality, MI, stroke, and target vessel revascularization, with a 44% decrease in risk of repeat percutaneous coronary intervention and major adverse cardiovascular events (odds ratio 0.68, 95% confidence interval 0.57 to 0.81) with multivessel revascularization compared to CULPRIT. Similarly, for long-term outcomes (follow-up 2.0 +/- 1.1 years), there was no difference for outcomes of MI, target vessel revascularization, and stent thrombosis, with 33%, 43%, and 53% decreases in risk of mortality, repeat percutaneous coronary intervention, coronary artery bypass grafting, respectively, and major adverse cardiovascular events (odds ratio 0.60, 95% confidence interval 0.50 to 0.72) with multivessel revascularization compared to CULPRIT. In conclusion, in patients with STEMI and MVD, multivessel revascularization appears to be safe compared to culprit artery-only revascularization. These findings support the need for a large-scale randomized trial to evaluate revascularization strategies in patients with STEMI and MVD. (C) 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. (Am J Cardiol 2011;107:1300-1310)
Files in This Item
There are no files associated with this item.
Appears in
Collections
Graduate School > Department of Biomedical Sciences > 1. Journal Articles

qrcode

Items in ScholarWorks are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Related Researcher

Researcher Rha, Seung Woon photo

Rha, Seung Woon
의과학과
Read more

Altmetrics

Total Views & Downloads

BROWSE