Key result
Culprit-lesion-only PCI significantly reduced 30-day mortality or severe renal failure compared with immediate multivessel PCI in cardiogenic shock (45.9% vs 55.4%; RR 0.83; 95% CI 0.71-0.96; P=0.01).
Why the study?
Does culprit-lesion-only PCI reduce 30-day mortality or severe renal failure requiring renal replacement therapy compared to immediate multivessel PCI in patients with cardiogenic shock complicating myocardial infarction?
RCT
randomized
Yes
Does culprit-lesion-only PCI reduce 30-day mortality or severe renal failure requiring renal replacement therapy compared to immediate multivessel PCI in patients with cardiogenic shock complicating myocardial infarction?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The CULPRIT-SHOCK trial demonstrated that a culprit-lesion-only PCI strategy reduces 30-day mortality and severe renal failure compared to immediate multivessel PCI in cardiogenic shock, prompting a reconsideration of current guidelines.
No abstract yet. The journal hasn't published one we can show.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Thiele et al. (2018) conducted an RCT in Cardiogenic shock complicating myocardial infarction with multivessel coronary artery disease. Culprit-lesion-only PCI vs. Immediate multivessel PCI was evaluated on 30-day mortality or severe renal failure requiring renal replacement therapy (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.71-0.96, p=0.01). Culprit-lesion-only PCI significantly reduced 30-day mortality or severe renal failure compared with immediate multivessel PCI in cardiogenic shock (45.9% vs 55.4%; RR 0.83; 95% CI 0.71-0.96; P=0.01).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: