• Alfredo M Rodriguez-Granillo, Walter Masson, Martin Lobo, Juan Mieres, Lisandro Pérez-Valega, Leandro Barbagelata, Karen Waisten, Carlos Fernández-Pereira, and Alfredo E Rodriguez.
• Centro de Estudios en Cardiología Intervencionista (CECI), Buenos Aires, Argentina - Mrodriguezgranillo@gmail.com.
• Panminerva Med. 2024 Dec 1; 66 (4): 408416408-416.

IntroductionRecently, the FFR-Guidance for Complete Nonculprit Revascularization (FULL REVASC) trial in ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients with multiple vessel disease (MVD) did not show differences in the composite endpoint of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, or unplanned revascularization than culprit-lesion-only percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) at 4.8 years, although complete revascularization is a recommendation IA in current guidelines. We want to determine through an updated meta-analysis whether complete revascularization is associated with decreased mortality and hard clinical endpoints compared to culprit lesion only PCI.Evidence AcquisitionWe searched MEDLINE, Embase, ISI Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) from January 1990 to April 2024 using the terms "percutaneous coronary intervention" combined with "non culprit lesions" or "culprit lesion" or "complete revascularization" or "incomplete revascularization." Additionally, a "snowball search" was conducted. Only randomized clinical trials (RCT) reporting mortality, re-infarction or new revascularization after at least 12 months and using predominantly drug eluting stents were included. The summary effect of different revascularization strategies on cardiovascular endpoints was estimated and measures of effect size were expressed as odds ratios (ORs).Evidence SynthesisEight RCT involving 9515 patients were included, with a follow-up range between 12 months and 4.8 years. Main findings show that culprit lesion revascularization was associated with an increased risk of MI (OR: 1.38; 95% CI: 1.05 to 1.81, I2 42%) and ischemia-guided revascularization (OR: 2.81; 95% CI: 1.86 to 4.26, I2 80%) compared to complete revascularization, without differences in overall mortality (OR: 1.15; 95% CI: 0.98 to 1.36, I2 2%).ConclusionsIn patients with STEMI and MVD without cardiogenic shock, our metanalysis showed that complete revascularization with PCI significantly reduced the risk of non-fatal myocardial reinfarction and ischemic-driven revascularization compared to culprit vessel-only revascularization, without differences in overall mortality.

22 keywords...

hide…