Key result
The optimal timing for complete revascularization of non-infarct-related lesions in patients with STEMI and multivessel disease remains a topic of ongoing discussion and guideline updates.
Why the study?
Does complete revascularization improve outcomes in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease and STEMI?
Does complete revascularization improve outcomes in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease and STEMI?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This editorial discusses the timing and evidence for complete revascularization in patients presenting with STEMI and multivessel coronary artery disease.
The performance of complete revascularization in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) has been a topic of debate. This scenario is extremely common, given that multivessel coronary artery disease is detected during index coronary angiography in approximately 50% of patients with STEMI.1 Although current guidelines from the American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association consider staged percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) a class I indication for non–infarct-related artery stenosis,2 during the previous 10 years extreme uncertainty existed about whether any non–infarct-related lesions should be revascularized, including lesions present in patients with concomitant cardiogenic shock. . . .
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
W. Schuyler Jones (2023) conducted an editorial in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) with multivessel coronary artery disease. Complete revascularization was evaluated. The optimal timing for complete revascularization of non-infarct-related lesions in patients with STEMI and multivessel disease remains a topic of ongoing discussion and guideline updates.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: