Key result
Culprit vessel intervention was associated with lower 30-day mortality compared to multivessel intervention in patients with AMI and cardiogenic shock (HR 0.63; 95% CI 0.45-0.88; P=0.009).
Why the study?
Does culprit vessel intervention reduce mortality compared to multivessel intervention in patients with acute myocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock, and multivessel disease?
Cohort (n=649)
Yes
Does culprit vessel intervention reduce mortality compared to multivessel intervention in patients with acute myocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock, and multivessel disease?
Hazard Ratio: 0.63 (95% CI 0.45–0.88)
Absolute Event Rate: 23.7% vs 34.5%
p-value: p=0.009
In patients with acute myocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock, and multivessel disease, culprit-lesion-only PCI is associated with lower 30-day and 1-year mortality compared to multivessel PCI.
Supports culprit-only PCI in AMI-cardiogenic shock; leaves open need for randomized confirmation in multivessel disease.
BACKGROUND: In patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and cardiogenic shock (CS), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of the culprit vessel is associated with improved outcomes. A large majority of these patients have multivessel disease (MVD). Whether or not PCI of non-culprit disease in the acute setting improves outcomes continues to be debated. We evaluated the prognostic impact of revascularization strategy for patients presenting with AMI and CS. METHODS: We compared culprit vessel intervention (CVI) versus multivessel intervention in 649 patients with AMI, CS, and MVD enrolled in the British Columbia Cardiac Registry. We evaluated mortality at 30 days and 1 year. RESULTS: CVI was associated with lower mortality at 30 days (23.7% vs. 34.5%, P = 0.004) and 1 year (32.6% vs. 44.3%, P = 0.003). CVI was an independent predictor for survival at 30 days (HR = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.45-0.88, P = 0.009) and 1 year (HR = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.54-0.96, P = 0.027). These findings were confirmed in propensity-matched cohorts. Subgroup analyses indicated that CVI was associated with lower mortality in patients aged <80 years; non-diabetics; and those presenting with ST-elevation MI. When analyzing non-culprit anatomy, PCI of non-culprit LAD disease was associated with higher 1-year mortality (HR = 1.51, 95% CI: 1.13-2.01, P = 0.006), primarily with non-culprit proximal LAD disease (HR = 1.82, 95% CI: 1.20-2.76, P = 0.005). However, PCI of non-culprit non-proximal LAD, LCx, and RCA disease was not associated with mortality. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with AMI and CS, a strategy of CVI appears to be associated with lower mortality. These findings are consistent with recently published randomized-controlled trial data.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
McNeice et al. (2018) conducted a cohort in Acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock (n=649). Culprit vessel intervention vs. Multivessel intervention was evaluated on Mortality at 30 days (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.45-0.88, p=0.009). Culprit vessel intervention was associated with lower 30-day mortality compared to multivessel intervention in patients with AMI and cardiogenic shock (HR 0.63; 95% CI 0.45-0.88; P=0.009).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: