@article{CDT11395,
author = {Satyanarayana R. Vaidya and Santhosh R. Devarapally and Sameer Arora},
title = {Infarct related artery only versus complete revascularization in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multi vessel disease: a meta-analysis},
journal = {Cardiovascular Diagnosis and Therapy},
volume = {7},
number = {1},
year = {2016},
keywords = {},
abstract = {Background: The 2015 American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association (ACCF/AHA) focused update on primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) only gives a class II b (weak) indication for non-infarct artery intervention at the time of primary PCI. Recent randomized controlled trials, however, suggest strong evidence supporting complete revascularization.
Methods: A systematic search was conducted in PUBMED, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane central register for randomized controlled trials comparing complete versus infarct artery (IRA) only revascularization in patients with STEMI. A meta-analysis was performed using the data extracted from each study. Summary risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for five outcomes.
Results: Six trials fulfilled the inclusion criteria yielding 1,792 patients. Follow up ranged from 6 months to 2.5 years. The incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) was significantly lower in the complete revascularization group compared to the IRA only revascularization (13.8% vs. 25.1%, RR =0.51; 95% CI: 0.41–0.64, P},
issn = {2223-3660}, url = {https://cdt.amegroups.org/article/view/11395}
}