Optimal timing of staged percutaneous coronary intervention in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients with multivessel disease

被引:7
|
作者
Zhao, Xue-Dong [1 ]
Zhao, Guan-Qi [1 ]
Wang, Xiao [1 ]
Shi, Shu-Tian [1 ]
Zheng, Wen [1 ]
Guo, Rui-Feng [1 ]
Nie, Shao-Ping [1 ]
机构
[1] Capital Med Univ, Beijing Inst Heart Lung & Blood Vessel Dis, Beijing Anzhen Hosp, Beijing, Peoples R China
基金
国家高技术研究发展计划(863计划);
关键词
Myocardial infarction; Multivessel disease; Non-culprit lesion; Percutaneous coronary intervention; Timing; DUAL ANTIPLATELET THERAPY; MULTI-VESSEL REVASCULARIZATION; GUIDELINE FOCUSED UPDATE; ARTERY-DISEASE; ACC/AHA GUIDELINE; CULPRIT LESION; STRATEGIES; DURATION; ANGIOPLASTY; OUTCOMES;
D O I
10.11909/j.issn.1671-5411.2018.05.005
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background Studies have shown that staged percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for non-culprit lesions is beneficial for prognosis of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients with multivessel disease. However, the optimal timing of staged revascularization is still controversial. This study aimed to find the optimal timing of staged revascularization. Methods A total of 428 STEMI patients with multivessel disease who underwent primary PCI and staged PCI were included. According to the time interval between primary and staged PCI, patients were divided into three groups (<= 1 week, 1-2 weeks, and 2-12 weeks after primary PCI). The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), a composite of all-cause death, non-fatal re-infarction, repeat revascularization, and stroke. Cox regression model was used to assess the association between staged PCI timing and risk of MACE. Results During the follow-up, 119 participants had MACEs. There was statistical difference in MACE incidence among the three groups (<= 1 week: 23.0%; 1-2 weeks: 33.0%; 2-12 weeks: 40.0%; P = 0.001). In the multivariable adjustment model, the timing interval of staged PCI <= 1 week and 1-2 weeks were both significantly associated with a lower risk of MACE [hazard ratio (HR): 0.40, 95% confidence intervals (CI): 0.24-0.65; HR: 0.54, 95% CI: 0.31-0.93, respectively], mainly attributed to a lower risk of repeat revascularization (HR: 0.41, 95% CI: 0.24-0.70; HR: 0.36, 95% CI: 0.18-0.7), compared with a strategy of 2-12 weeks later of primary PCI. Conclusions The optimal timing of staged PCI for non-culprit vessels should be within two weeks after primary PCI for STEMI patients.
引用
收藏
页码:356 / 362
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Timing selection of delayed percutaneous coronary intervention in ST-segment elevation of myocardial infarction
    Wen, Zheng
    Man, Yu Cheuk
    Jian, Sun
    Liu, Jing
    Dong, Zhao
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY, 2014, 64 (16) : C92 - C92
  • [22] Optimal timing of percutaneous coronary intervention in elderly patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction presenting late
    Jia, Haiyan
    Zhang, Weifeng
    Jia, Shengqi
    Zhang, Jun
    Xu, Zhanwen
    Li, Yaqin
    KARDIOCHIRURGIA I TORAKOCHIRURGIA POLSKA-POLISH JOURNAL OF THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY, 2024, 21 (03) : 143 - 152
  • [23] Revascularization strategies in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel coronary artery disease: urgent or staged?
    Cubero-Gallego, Hector
    Romaguera, Rafael
    Ariza-Sole, Albert
    Gomez-Hospital, Joan Antoni
    Cequier, Angel
    CARDIOVASCULAR DIAGNOSIS AND THERAPY, 2017, 7 : S82 - S85
  • [24] The optimal percutaneous coronary intervention strategy for patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease: a pairwise and network meta-analysis
    Hu, Meng-Jin
    Tan, Jiang-Shan
    Jiang, Wen-Yang
    Gao, Xiao-Jin
    Yang, Yue-Jin
    THERAPEUTIC ADVANCES IN CHRONIC DISEASE, 2022, 13
  • [25] Culprit Vessel-Only vs. Staged Multivessel Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Strategies in Patients With Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction
    Toyota, Toshiaki
    Shiomi, Hiroki
    Taniguchi, Tomohiko
    Morimoto, Takeshi
    Furukawa, Yutaka
    Nakagawa, Yoshihisa
    Horie, Minoru
    Kimura, Takeshi
    CIRCULATION JOURNAL, 2016, 80 (02) : 371 - +
  • [26] Re: Multivessel Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients with ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction with Cardiogenic Shock Response
    Rhee, Tae-Min
    Lee, Joo Myung
    Choi, Ki Hong
    Kim, Jihoon
    Kim, Hyun Kuk
    Song, Young Bin
    Hahn, Joo-Yong
    EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2018, 29 (06) : E60 - E61
  • [27] Current Status of Coronary Intervention in Patients with ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction and Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease
    Kim, Min Chul
    Jeong, Myung Ho
    Kim, Sang Hyung
    Hong, Young Joon
    Kim, Ju Han
    Ahn, Youngkeun
    KOREAN CIRCULATION JOURNAL, 2014, 44 (03) : 131 - 138
  • [28] Management of Multivessel Coronary Disease in ST-segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction
    Banning, Amerjeet S.
    Gershlick, Anthony H.
    CURRENT CARDIOLOGY REPORTS, 2015, 17 (09)
  • [29] The optimal timing for intervention in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Chen, Yi
    Li, Meng
    Wu, Yanqing
    FRONTIERS IN CARDIOVASCULAR MEDICINE, 2024, 11
  • [30] Management of Multivessel Coronary Disease in ST-segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction
    Amerjeet S. Banning
    Anthony H. Gershlick
    Current Cardiology Reports, 2015, 17