Author + information
- Ana Belen Cid Alvarez1,
- Carlos Galvao Braga2,
- Alfredo Redondo Dieguez3,
- Ramiro Trillo4,
- Diego Lopez Otero5,
- Raymundo Ocaranza-Sanchez6,
- Belen Alvarez Alvarez7,
- Kieran Docherty8 and
- Jose Ramon González-Juanatey9
- 1HCU Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de compostela, Spain
- 2Cleveland Clinic Foundation Weston Fl
- 3Christus Health
- 4Hospital Clinico Universitario de Santiago, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
- 5Unknown, Santiago De Composte, Spain
- 6Unknown, Spain, Spain
- 7Au;tman Hospital
- 8Golden Jubilee National Hospital
- 9Philippine Heart Center
The optimal treatment of patients with multivessel coronary artery disease and ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction (STEMI) who undergo primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is controversial. The aim of this study was to access the prognostic impact of multivessel PCI versus culprit vessel-only PCI in real-world patients with STEMI and multivessel disease.
This was a retrospective cohort study of 1499 patients with STEMI diagnosis who underwent primary-PCI between January 2008 and December 2015. We performed a propensity score-matched analysis to draw up two groups of 225 patients paired according to whether or not they had undergone multivessel PCI or culprit vessel-only PCI.
During follow-up (median 2.36 years), after propensity score matching, patients who underwent multivessel PCI had lower rates of mortality (7.6% versus 11.6%, log rank p=0.022), unplanned repeated revascularization (9.4% versus 14.7%, log rank p=0.010) and MACE (29.7% versus 33.8%, log rank p=0.016). These patients had also a trend to lower incidence of myocardial infarction (8.0% vs. 4.9%, log rank p=0.093).
In real-world patients presenting with STEMI and multivessel coronary artery disease, multivessel PCI strategy was associated with lower rates of mortality, unplanned repeated revascularization and MACE.
CORONARY: Acute Myocardial Infarction