Key result
Preventive PCI fails to improve follow-up LVEF compared to culprit-only PCI in multivessel STEMI.
Why the study?
The impact of additional preventive PCI on iatrogenic myocardial infarction and long-term left ventricular volumes in STEMI patients with multivessel disease was uncertain.
Does additional preventive PCI improve left ventricular remodelling or cause iatrogenic myocardial infarction compared to culprit-only primary PCI in patients with STEMI and multivessel disease?
RCT (n=219)
Yes
Does additional preventive PCI improve left ventricular remodelling or cause iatrogenic myocardial infarction compared to culprit-only primary PCI in patients with STEMI and multivessel disease?
Absolute Event Rate: 54.4% vs 51.7%
p-value: p=0.23
In STEMI patients with multivessel disease, preventive PCI of non-culprit lesions did not significantly affect long-term LV volumes or ejection fraction compared to culprit-only PCI, and procedure-related MI was uncommon.
Supports low iatrogenic MI risk with preventive PCI yet shows no LV remodeling benefit; leaves open mechanisms behind PRAMI's clinical gains.
Objective We hypothesised that, compared with culprit-only primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), additional preventive PCI in selected patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction with multivessel disease would not be associated with iatrogenic myocardial infarction, and would be associated with reductions in left ventricular (LV) volumes in the longer term. Methods In the preventive angioplasty in myocardial infarction trial (PRAMI; ISRCTN73028481 ), cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) was prespecified in two centres and performed (median, IQR) 3 (1, 5) and 209 (189, 957) days after primary PCI. Results From 219 enrolled patients in two sites, 84% underwent CMR. 42 (50%) were randomised to culprit-artery-only PCI and 42 (50%) were randomised to preventive PCI. Follow-up CMR scans were available in 72 (86%) patients. There were two (4.8%) cases of procedure-related myocardial infarction in the preventive PCI group. The culprit-artery-only group had a higher proportion of anterior myocardial infarctions (MIs) (55% vs 24%). Infarct sizes (% LV mass) at baseline and follow-up were similar. At follow-up, there was no difference in LV ejection fraction (%, median (IQR), (culprit-artery-only PCI vs preventive PCI) 51.7 (42.9, 60.2) vs 54.4 (49.3, 62.8), p=0.23), LV end-diastolic volume (mL/m2, 69.3 (59.4, 79.9) vs 66.1 (54.7, 73.7), p=0.48) and LV end-systolic volume (mL/m2, 31.8 (24.4, 43.0) vs 30.7 (23.0, 36.3), p=0.20). Non-culprit angiographic lesions had low-risk Syntax scores and 47% had non-complex characteristics. Conclusions Compared with culprit-only PCI, non-infarct-artery MI in the preventive PCI strategy was uncommon and LV volumes and ejection fraction were similar.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mangion et al. (2016) conducted an RCT in ST-elevation myocardial infarction with multivessel disease (n=219). Preventive percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) vs. Culprit-only primary PCI was evaluated on Left ventricular ejection fraction at follow-up (p=0.23). In patients with STEMI and multivessel disease, preventive PCI compared with culprit-only PCI resulted in similar follow-up left ventricular ejection fraction (54.4% vs 51.7%, p=0.23).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: