Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.
KMID : 0368120110410120718
Korean Circulation Journal
2011 Volume.41 No. 12 p.718 ~ p.725
Culprit-Lesion-Only Versus Multivessel Revascularization Using Drug-Eluting Stents in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Korean Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry-Based Analysis
Jo Hyun-Su

Park Jong-Seon
Sohn Jang-Won
Yoon Joon-Cheol
Sohn Chang-Woo
Lee Sang-Hee
Hong Geu-Ru
Shin Dong-Gu
Kim Young-Jo
Jeong Myung-Ho
Chae Shung-Chul
Hur Seung-Ho
Hong Taek-Jong
Seong In-Whan
Chae Jei-Keon
Rhew Jay-Young
Chae In-Ho
Cho Myeong-Chan
Bae Jang-Ho
Rha Seung-Woon
Kim Chong-Jin
Choi Dong-Hoon
Jang Yang-Soo
Yoon Jung-Han
Chung Wook-Sung
Seung Ki-Bae
Park Seung-Jung
Abstract
Background and Objectives: In patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and multivessel disease, complete revascularization (CR) for non-culprit lesions is not routinely recommended. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of multivessel compared with infarct-related artery (IRA)-only revascularization in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for STEMI.

Subjects and Methods: From the Korean Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry (KAMIR) database, 1,094 STEMI patients with multivessel disease who underwent primary PCI with drug-eluting stents were enrolled in this study. The patients were divided into two groups: culprit-vessel-only revascularization (COR, n=827) group; multivessel revascularization, including non-IRA (MVR, n=267) group. The primary endpoint of this study included major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), such as death, myocardial infarction, or target or nontarget lesion revascularization at one year.

Results: There was no difference in clinical characteristics between the two groups. During the one-year follow-up, 102 (15.2%) patients in the COR group and 32 (14.2%) in the MVR group experienced at least one MACE (p=0.330). There were no differences between the two groups in terms of rates of death, myocardial infarction, or revascularization (2.1% vs. 2.0%, 0.7% vs. 0.8%, and 11.7% vs. 10.1%, respectively; p=0.822, 0.910, and 0.301, respectively). The MACE rate was higher in the incompletely revascularized patients than in the completely revascularized patients (15% vs. 9.5%, p=0.039), and the difference was attributable to a higher rate of nontarget vessel revascularization (8.6% vs. 1.8%, p=0.002).

Conclusion: Although multivessel angioplasty during primary PCI for STEMI did not reduce the MACE rate compared with culprit-vessel-only PCI, CR was associated with a lower rate of repeat revascularization after multivessel PCI.
KEYWORD
Myocardial infarction, Coronary artery disease, Angioplasty
FullTexts / Linksout information
 
Listed journal information
SCI(E) ÇмúÁøÈïÀç´Ü(KCI) KoreaMed ´ëÇÑÀÇÇÐȸ ȸ¿ø