Key result
Immediate complete revascularization shows no MACE benefit over staged revascularization in multivessel STEMI.
Why the study?
Multivessel CAD is frequently observed in patients with STEMI, but the optimal timing for complete revascularization of non-culprit lesions remains a subject of ongoing debate.
Does immediate complete revascularization reduce major adverse cardiovascular events compared to staged complete revascularization in patients with STEMI and multivessel coronary artery disease?
Meta-Analysis (n=3,017)
Does immediate complete revascularization reduce major adverse cardiovascular events compared to staged complete revascularization in patients with STEMI and multivessel coronary artery disease?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
In patients with STEMI and multivessel disease, immediate and staged complete revascularization yield similar MACE rates, but immediate revascularization is associated with higher all-cause mortality while staged revascularization carries a higher risk of myocardial infarction.
Background Multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) is frequently observed in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). However, the optimal timing for complete revascularization remains a subject of ongoing debate. This study aimed to compare major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and other clinical outcomes between immediate complete revascularization (ICR) and staged complete revascularization (SCR). Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ICR and SCR in patients with STEMI and multivessel CAD was performed. The main outcome was MACE, and the secondary outcomes included all-cause death, cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), and unplanned revascularization (UR). Results A total of seven RCTs (n = 3,017; mean follow-up, 1.06 years) were included in this meta-analysis. Baseline characteristics included mean age, 58.6–66.0 years; male patients, 62.3%–83.0%; diabetes mellitus, 13.8%–42.0%; and hypertension, 40.0%–94.0%. No significant difference in MACE was detected between the ICR and SCR groups (10.3% vs. 11.4%; risk ratio (RR) 0.96; 95% CI 0.67–1.37; p = 0.81). Similarly, the rates of cardiac death and UR were not significantly different. ICR was associated with a higher rate of all-cause mortality (5.0% vs. 3.4%; RR 1.45; 95% CI 1.02–2.05; p = 0.04). Conversely, SCR exhibited a significantly higher incidence of MI (2.8% vs. 4.4%; RR 0.64; 95% CI 0.41–0.99; p = 0.04). Conclusions While MACE rates were comparable between ICR and SCR, secondary endpoint analyses revealed that ICR was associated with a higher rate of all-cause mortality and SCR was associated with a higher risk of MI, warranting cautious interpretation. Staged revascularization may help balance ischemic risk reduction with procedural safety in selected patients with STEMI and multivessel disease.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mok et al. (2026) conducted a meta-analysis in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) with multivessel coronary artery disease (n=3,017). Immediate complete revascularization (ICR) vs. Staged complete revascularization (SCR) was evaluated on Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.67-1.37, p=0.81). Immediate vs staged complete revascularization in multivessel STEMI showed no significant difference in MACE (10.3% vs 11.4%; RR 0.96; 95% CI 0.67-1.37; p=0.81).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: