Revascularization Timing in Acute Coronary Syndrome

Multivessel disease is often present in ST elevation acute myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients. The AHA/ACC 2021 revascularization guidelines recommend staged complete revascularization as class I, single-setting complete revascularization as class 2b, and recommend against culprit only revascularization.

Nueva y discrepante información sobre los vasos no culpables en el infarto

At present, we have more randomized studies (BIOVASC, FIRE and MULTISTAR) comparing staged vs single-setting complete revascularization, but we lack information to decide on the best strategy. 

This was a meta-analysis of 16 randomized studies including 11,876 STEMI and NSTEMI patients undergoing culprit only, single-setting, and staged complete revascularization, excluding those with cardiogenic shock. 

Primary end point was cardiovascular death or AMI.

3,056 patients received single-setting complete revascularization (25.7%), 4,328 patients received staged complete revascularization (36.4%) and 4,492 patients received culprit-only revascularization (37.8%). Mean age was 65 and they were mostly men. 

Primary end point resulted in favor of single-setting complete revascularization (odds ratio [OR], 0.52 [95% CI, 0.41–0.65]; OR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.62–0.88] for staged complete and culprit only revascularization respectively), making this one the strategy of choice, followed by complete staged and finally culprit only. 

Read also: ULTIMATE III: Use of IVUS for Coronary De Novo Lesion Drug Coated Balloon Angioplasty.

Reduction in adverse events rate (MACE) also favored single-setting complete revascularization over the other two (OR, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.32–0.56]; OR, 0.62 [95% CI, 0.47–0.82] for complete staged and culprit only respectively), also all-cause mortality and AMI (OR, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.40–0.67]; OR, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.67–0.91]), AMI (OR, 0.39 [95% CI, 0.26–0.57]; OR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.59–0.90]) and need for unplanned revascularization (OR, 0.30 [95% CI, 0.18–0.47]; OR, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.30–0.71]).

There were no differences in cardiovascular mortality between the strategies.

These results were consistent across STEMI, NSTEMI and unstable angina patients.

Conclusion

Single-setting complete revascularization might offer greater reduction of cardiovascular events rate in patients with acute myocardial infarction and multivessel disease. We need more, large scale, randomized studies comparing single-setting vs staged complete revascularization procedures to better assess the optimal timing for complete revascularization. 

 

Dr. Carlos Fava - Consejo Editorial SOLACI

Dr. Carlos Fava.
Member of the Editorial Board of SOLACI.org.

Original Title: Culprit-Only Revascularization, Single-Setting  Complete Revascularization, and Staged  Complete Revascularization in Acute Myocardial  Infarction: Insights From a Mixed Treatment  Comparison Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

Reference: Muhammad Haisum Maqsood, et al. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2024;17:e013737. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.123.013737.


Subscribe to our weekly newsletter

Get the latest scientific articles on interventional cardiology

More articles by this author

Hybrid Coronary Revascularization versus Conventional Bypass Surgery in Left Main Coronary Artery Disease

Significant left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease continues to represent a therapeutic challenge, particularly in patients with complex multivessel disease and high SYNTAX scores,...

Comparison of strategies: NMA of IVUS, OCT, or angiography in complex lesions

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in complex lesions continues to represent a technical challenge in contemporary interventional cardiology. Angiography, although it remains the most widely...

Dynamic Coronary Roadmap: does it really help reduce contrast use?

Contrast-induced nephropathy remains a relevant complication of percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI), particularly in patients with multiple comorbidities and complex coronary anatomies. Dynamic Coronary Roadmap...

Long-Term Cardiovascular Risk in Patients With ANOCA: A Clinical Reality to Consider?

Chronic stable angina (CSA) remains one of the most frequent reasons for referral to diagnostic coronary angiography (CAG). In a substantial proportion of these...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

TEER plus optimal medical therapy versus medical therapy alone in functional mitral regurgitation

Mitral regurgitation (MR) is a highly prevalent valvular heart disease that, in advanced stages and when left untreated, is associated with reduced quality of...

Hybrid Coronary Revascularization versus Conventional Bypass Surgery in Left Main Coronary Artery Disease

Significant left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease continues to represent a therapeutic challenge, particularly in patients with complex multivessel disease and high SYNTAX scores,...

VECTOR: First Percutaneous Aorto-Coronary Bypass Case, a New Conceptual Approach

Coronary obstruction represents one of the most severe complications associated with transcatheter aortic valve implantation, particularly in valve-in-valve scenarios involving surgical bioprostheses, narrow aortic...