Complete or Culprit-Only Revascularization for Patients With Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Pairwise and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2017 Feb 27;10(4):315-324. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2016.11.047.

Abstract

Objectives: The authors sought to compare the effectiveness of the different revascularization strategies in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients with multivessel coronary artery disease undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

Background: Recent randomized trials have suggested that multivessel complete revascularization at the time of primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is associated with better outcomes, however; the optimum timing for nonculprit PCI is unknown.

Methods: Trials that randomized STEMI patients with multivessel disease to any combination of the 4 different revascularization strategies (i.e., complete revascularization at the index procedure, staged procedure during the hospitalization, staged procedure after discharge or culprit-only revascularization) were included. Random effect risk ratios (RRs) were conducted. Network meta-analysis was constructed using mixed treatment comparison models, and the 4 revascularization strategies were compared.

Results: A total of 10 trials with 2,285 patients were included. In the pairwise meta-analysis, complete revascularization (i.e., at the index procedure or as a staged procedure) was associated with a lower risk of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (RR: 0.57; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.42 to 0.77), due to lower risk of urgent revascularization (RR: 0.44; 95% CI: 0.30 to 0.66). The risk of all-cause mortality (RR: 0.76; 95% CI: 0.52 to 1.12), and spontaneous reinfarction (RR: 0.54; 95% CI: 0.23 to 1.27) was similar. The reduction in the risk of MACE was observed irrespective of the timing of nonculprit artery revascularization in the mixed treatment model.

Conclusions: Current evidence from randomized trials suggests that the risk of all-cause mortality and spontaneous reinfarction is not different among the various revascularization strategies for multivessel disease. Complete revascularization at the index procedure or as a staged procedure (either during the hospitalization or after discharge) was associated with a reduction of MACE due to reduction in urgent revascularization with no difference between these 3 strategies. Future trials are needed to determine the impact of complete revascularization on the risk of all-cause mortality and spontaneous reinfarction.

Keywords: meta-analysis; myocardial infarction; percutaneous coronary intervention.

Publication types

  • Meta-Analysis
  • Review

MeSH terms

  • Cause of Death
  • Coronary Artery Disease / diagnostic imaging
  • Coronary Artery Disease / mortality
  • Coronary Artery Disease / therapy*
  • Evidence-Based Medicine
  • Humans
  • Network Meta-Analysis
  • Odds Ratio
  • Percutaneous Coronary Intervention / adverse effects
  • Percutaneous Coronary Intervention / methods*
  • Percutaneous Coronary Intervention / mortality
  • Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
  • Recurrence
  • Risk Assessment
  • Risk Factors
  • ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction / diagnostic imaging
  • ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction / mortality
  • ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction / physiopathology
  • ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction / therapy*
  • Time Factors
  • Treatment Outcome