Cochrane corner: complete versus culprit-only revascularisation in ST segment elevation myocardial infarction with multivessel disease
| Autor: | J. Matthew Brennan, Claudio Bravo, Thomas Engstrøm, E. Magnus Ohman, Deepak L. Bhatt, Sameer A. Hirji, Dan Eik Høfsten, Tsuyoshi Kaneko, David P. Faxon, Christian Gluud |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2018 |
| Předmět: |
Relative risk reduction
medicine.medical_specialty business.industry medicine.medical_treatment Percutaneous coronary intervention 030204 cardiovascular system & hematology medicine.disease Culprit Coronary artery disease 03 medical and health sciences 0302 clinical medicine Systematic review Internal medicine Conventional PCI medicine Cardiology 030212 general & internal medicine Myocardial infarction Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine business Stroke |
| Zdroj: | Heart. 104:1144-1147 |
| ISSN: | 1468-201X 1355-6037 |
| Popis: | Approximately half of patients presenting to the hospital with an acutely occluded coronary artery that is causing ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) have significant stenosis of other coronary arteries.1 Observational studies have shown that patients with STEMI along with multivessel disease (MVD) fare worse than those with single vessel disease. Timely revascularisation of the culprit coronary artery is considered crucial for the treatment of STEMI. However, the management of other diseased, non-culprit coronary vascular territories has been an area of considerable debate. Recently published randomised clinical trials (RCTs) suggesting a beneficial effect from complete revascularisation have led to changes in guidelines, now supporting intervention of non-culprit vessels (class IIa or IIb recommendation).2 3 The goal of this Cochrane systematic review was to compare efficacy and safety of the culprit-only versus complete revascularisation strategies in patients with STEMI and MVD. Importantly, we also analysed comprehensively the quality of the evidence using the Cochrane standards. We searched for RCTs comparing complete revascularisation versus culprit-only percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in adult patients (≥18 years old) with STEMI and MVD in the Cochrane Central Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, WHO ICTRP Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov since their inception up to January 2017.4 We extracted data on all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, revascularisation and adverse events that included stroke, acute kidney injury and bleeding. The data were extracted on short-term (within the first 30 days after the index procedure) and long-term (1 year or greater after the index procedure) outcomes. Data were analysed as risk ratio (RR) with 95% CI, and we conducted analyses according to the statistical guidelines contained in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.5 Furthermore, for trial sequential analysis (TSA),6 the required information size was calculated based on a 20% relative risk reduction (RRR) in the intervention group, a type … |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|