JOURNAL ARTICLE
MULTICENTER STUDY

Percutaneous coronary intervention for nonculprit vessels in cardiogenic shock complicating ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction

Jeong Hoon Yang, Joo-Yong Hahn, Pil Sang Song, Young Bin Song, Seung-Hyuk Choi, Jin-Ho Choi, Sang Hoon Lee, Myung-Ho Jeong, Dong-Joo Choi, Young Jo Kim, Hyeon-Cheol Gwon
Critical Care Medicine 2014, 42 (1): 17-25
24105454

OBJECTIVES: We investigated the clinical impact of multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock with multivessel disease.

DESIGN: A prospective, multicenter, observational study.

SETTING: Cardiac ICU of a university hospital.

PATIENTS: Between November 2005 and September 2010, 338 patients were selected. Inclusion criteria were as follows: 1) ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock and 2) multivessel disease with successful primary percutaneous coronary intervention for the infarct-related artery. Patients were divided into multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention and culprit-only percutaneous coronary intervention.

INTERVENTIONS: None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Median follow-up duration was 224 days (interquartile range, 46-383 d). Multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention was performed during the primary percutaneous coronary intervention in 60 patients (17.8%). In-hospital mortality was similar in both groups (multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention vs culprit-only percutaneous coronary intervention, 31.7% vs 24.5%; p = 0.247). All-cause mortality during follow-up was not significantly different between the two groups after adjusting for patient, angiographic, and procedural characteristics as well as propensity scores for receiving multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention (35.0% vs 30.6%; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.61-1.86; p = 0.831). There were no significant differences between the groups in rates of major adverse cardiac events (41.7% vs 37.1%; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.62-1.71; p = 0.908) and any revascularization (6.7% vs 4.7%; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.88; 95% CI, 0.51-6.89; p = 0.344).

CONCLUSIONS: Multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention could not reduce the prevalence of mortality in patients with cardiogenic shock complicating ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease during primary percutaneous coronary intervention.

Full Text Links

Find Full Text Links for this Article

Discussion

You are not logged in. Sign Up or Log In to join the discussion.

Related Papers

Remove bar
Read by QxMD icon Read
24105454
×

Save your favorite articles in one place with a free QxMD account.

×

Search Tips

Use Boolean operators: AND/OR

diabetic AND foot
diabetes OR diabetic

Exclude a word using the 'minus' sign

Virchow -triad

Use Parentheses

water AND (cup OR glass)

Add an asterisk (*) at end of a word to include word stems

Neuro* will search for Neurology, Neuroscientist, Neurological, and so on

Use quotes to search for an exact phrase

"primary prevention of cancer"
(heart or cardiac or cardio*) AND arrest -"American Heart Association"