Key result
Multivessel PCI showed no significant difference in mortality (OR 0.85; 95% CI 0.70-1.04) but decreased long-term MACE (OR 0.69; 95% CI 0.51-0.93) compared with culprit vessel PCI in NSTE-ACS.
Why the study?
Does multivessel PCI reduce mortality, myocardial infarction, unplanned revascularisation, or MACE in patients with NSTE-ACS and multivessel disease compared to culprit vessel PCI?
Meta-Analysis (n=5,414)
Does multivessel PCI reduce mortality, myocardial infarction, unplanned revascularisation, or MACE in patients with NSTE-ACS and multivessel disease compared to culprit vessel PCI?
Effect estimate: OR 0.85 (95% CI 0.70 to 1.04)
p-value: p=0.114
In patients with NSTE-ACS and multivessel disease, multivessel PCI appears safe and may reduce long-term MACE and the need for unplanned revascularization compared to culprit-only PCI.
Multivessel PCI may reduce long-term MACE without mortality impact in NSTE-ACS; extends meta-analytic support for complete revascularization.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Qiao et al. (2015) conducted a meta-analysis in Non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE-ACS) with multivessel disease (n=5,414). Multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) vs. Culprit vessel PCI was evaluated on All-cause mortality (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.04, p=0.114). Multivessel PCI showed no significant difference in mortality (OR 0.85; 95% CI 0.70-1.04) but decreased long-term MACE (OR 0.69; 95% CI 0.51-0.93) compared with culprit vessel PCI in NSTE-ACS.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: