Key result
Multi-vessel percutaneous coronary intervention independently increased the risk of periprocedural myocardial injury (OR 1.654) compared to single-vessel PCI in patients with stable coronary artery disease.
Why the study?
Does multi-vessel PCI increase the risk of periprocedural myocardial injury in stable CAD patients undergoing elective PCI?
Cohort (n=544)
No
Does multi-vessel PCI increase the risk of periprocedural myocardial injury in stable CAD patients undergoing elective PCI?
In patients with stable CAD undergoing elective PCI, a multi-vessel intervention strategy is independently associated with an increased risk of periprocedural myocardial injury compared to single-vessel PCI.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Caution advised for multi-vessel PCI in elective stable CAD; leaves open whether staging reduces periprocedural injury risk.
BACKGROUNDS: Periprocedural myocardial injury (PMI) after elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) significantly influences the prognosis of coronary artery disease (CAD). However, it was unclear whether the occurrence of PMI was associated with a series of controllable factors, such as PCI strategy or severity of CAD. METHODS: A total of 544 consecutive stable CAD patients underwent elective PCI were enrolled. The main outcome is PMI, defined as troponin T after PCI was at least one value above the 99th percentile upper reference limit. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE), including all-cause death, repeat myocardial infarction and target vessel revascularization were record in the period of follow-up. Univariate and multivariate analysis was applied to assess predictors for the occurrence of PMI. RESULTS: The incidence of PMI was 38.8% in the study. Compared with non-PMI patients (n = 333), PMI patients (n = 211) had more diseased vessels, higher Gensini and Syntax score. Meanwhile, there were higher incidence of MACE in PMI groups (9.5% vs. 3.2%, P < 0.01). We found that PMI patients underwent higher proportion of multi-vessel PCI simultaneously (32.2% vs. 10.5%, P < 0.01) and had more stents implanted (1.8 ± 0.8 vs. 1.4 ± 0.6, P < 0.01). Importantly, after simultaneously adjusted by other factors (such as age, diabetes, total cholesterol, number of diseased vessels, Gensini score and stent length), the risk of PMI was still increased 84% by multi-vessel PCI independently (OR = 1.654, 95% CI = 1.004-2.720, P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The phenomenon of PMI occurred more commonly in stable CAD patients underwent multi-vessel PCI. Multi-vessel international therapy could increase the risk of PMI in elective PCI.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chen et al. (2017) conducted a cohort in Stable coronary artery disease (n=544). Multi-vessel percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) vs. Single-vessel PCI was evaluated on Periprocedural myocardial injury (PMI) (OR 1.654, 95% CI 1.004-2.720, p=<0.05). Multi-vessel percutaneous coronary intervention independently increased the risk of periprocedural myocardial injury (OR 1.654) compared to single-vessel PCI in patients with stable coronary artery disease.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: