Staged versus index procedure complete revascularization in ST‐elevation myocardial infarction: A meta‐analysis

BACKGROUND: Complete revascularization of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel coronary artery disease reduces adverse events compared to infarct-related artery only revascularization. Whether complete revascularization should be done as multivessel intervention during index procedure or as a staged procedure remains controversial. METHOD: We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing outcomes of multivessel intervention in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel coronary artery disease as staged procedure versus at the time of index procedure. Composite of death or myocardial infarction was the primary outcome. Mantel-Haenszel risk ratios were calculated using random effect model. RESULTS: Six randomized studies with a total of 1126 patients met our selection criteria. At a mean follow-up of 13 months, composite of myocardial infarction or death (7.2% vs 11.7%, RR: 1.66, 95%CI: 1.09-2.52, P = 0.02), all cause mortality (RR: 2.55, 95%CI: 1.42-4.58, P < 0.01), cardiovascular mortality (RR: 2.8, 95%CI: 1.33-5.86, P = 0.01), and short-term (<30 days) mortality (RR: 3.54, 95%CI: 1.51-8.29, P < 0.01) occurred less often in staged versus index procedure multivessel revascularization. There was no difference in major adverse cardiac events (RR: 1.14, 95%CI: 0.88-1.49, P = 0.33), repeat myocardial infarction (RR: 1.14, 95%CI: 0.68-1.92, P = 0.61), and repeat revascularization (RR: 0.92, 95%CI: 0.66-1.28, P = 0.62). CONCLUSION: In patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel coronary artery disease, a strategy of complete revascularization as a staged procedure compared to index procedure revascularization results in reduced mortality without an increase in repeat myocardial infarction or need for repeat revascularization.