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
|
|
|
|