Cargando…

Comparison of Long‐Term Clinical Outcome Between Multivessel Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Infarct‐Related Artery–Only Revascularization for Patients With ST‐Segment–Elevation Myocardial Infarction With Cardiogenic Shock

BACKGROUND: Data are limited regarding long‐term outcomes in patients with ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease presenting with cardiogenic shock according to revascularization strategy. We sought to compare the 3‐year clinical outcomes of patients with ST‐segment‐eleva...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lee, Joo Myung, Rhee, Tae‐Min, Kim, Hyun Kuk, Hwang, Doyeon, Lee, Seung Hun, Choi, Ki Hong, Kim, Jihoon, Park, Taek Kyu, Yang, Jeong Hoon, Song, Young Bin, Choi, Jin‐Ho, Choi, Seung‐Hyuk, Koo, Bon‐Kwon, Chae, Shung Chull, Cho, Myeong‐Chan, Kim, Chong Jin, Kim, Ju Han, Kim, Hyo‐Soo, Gwon, Hyeon‐Cheol, Jeong, Myung Ho, Hahn, Joo‐Yong
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6951086/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31818215
http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.119.013870
_version_ 1783486215876509696
author Lee, Joo Myung
Rhee, Tae‐Min
Kim, Hyun Kuk
Hwang, Doyeon
Lee, Seung Hun
Choi, Ki Hong
Kim, Jihoon
Park, Taek Kyu
Yang, Jeong Hoon
Song, Young Bin
Choi, Jin‐Ho
Choi, Seung‐Hyuk
Koo, Bon‐Kwon
Chae, Shung Chull
Cho, Myeong‐Chan
Kim, Chong Jin
Kim, Ju Han
Kim, Hyo‐Soo
Gwon, Hyeon‐Cheol
Jeong, Myung Ho
Hahn, Joo‐Yong
author_facet Lee, Joo Myung
Rhee, Tae‐Min
Kim, Hyun Kuk
Hwang, Doyeon
Lee, Seung Hun
Choi, Ki Hong
Kim, Jihoon
Park, Taek Kyu
Yang, Jeong Hoon
Song, Young Bin
Choi, Jin‐Ho
Choi, Seung‐Hyuk
Koo, Bon‐Kwon
Chae, Shung Chull
Cho, Myeong‐Chan
Kim, Chong Jin
Kim, Ju Han
Kim, Hyo‐Soo
Gwon, Hyeon‐Cheol
Jeong, Myung Ho
Hahn, Joo‐Yong
author_sort Lee, Joo Myung
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Data are limited regarding long‐term outcomes in patients with ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease presenting with cardiogenic shock according to revascularization strategy. We sought to compare the 3‐year clinical outcomes of patients with ST‐segment‐elevation myocardial infarction multivessel disease with cardiogenic shock and patients with multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and infarct‐related artery (IRA)–only PCI. METHODS AND RESULTS: Of 13 104 patients from the nationwide, multicenter, prospective KAMIR‐NIH (Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry––National Institutes of Health) registry, we selected 659 patients with ST‐segment‐elevation myocardial infarction who had concomitant non‐IRA stenosis and presented with cardiogenic shock. The primary outcome was all‐cause death. Multivessel PCI was performed in 260 patients and IRA‐only PCI in 399 patients. At 3 years, patients in the multivessel PCI group had a lower risk of all‐cause death (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.45–0.94 [P=0.024]), all‐cause death or MI (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.41–0.84 [P=0.004]), and non‐IRA repeat revascularization (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.10–0.50 [P<0.001]) than those in the IRA‐only PCI group. The results were consistent after confounder adjustment by propensity score matching and inverse probability weighting analysis. Landmark analysis at 1 year demonstrated that the multivessel PCI group had a lower risk of recurrent MI and non‐IRA repeat revascularization beyond 1 year (log‐rank P=0.030 and P=0.017, respectively) than the IRA‐only PCI group. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with ST‐segment‐elevation myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock, multivessel PCI was associated with a lower risk of all‐cause death than IRA‐only PCI at 3 years, suggesting potential benefit of non‐IRA revascularization during the index hospitalization to improve long‐term clinical outcomes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6951086
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-69510862020-01-10 Comparison of Long‐Term Clinical Outcome Between Multivessel Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Infarct‐Related Artery–Only Revascularization for Patients With ST‐Segment–Elevation Myocardial Infarction With Cardiogenic Shock Lee, Joo Myung Rhee, Tae‐Min Kim, Hyun Kuk Hwang, Doyeon Lee, Seung Hun Choi, Ki Hong Kim, Jihoon Park, Taek Kyu Yang, Jeong Hoon Song, Young Bin Choi, Jin‐Ho Choi, Seung‐Hyuk Koo, Bon‐Kwon Chae, Shung Chull Cho, Myeong‐Chan Kim, Chong Jin Kim, Ju Han Kim, Hyo‐Soo Gwon, Hyeon‐Cheol Jeong, Myung Ho Hahn, Joo‐Yong J Am Heart Assoc Original Research BACKGROUND: Data are limited regarding long‐term outcomes in patients with ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease presenting with cardiogenic shock according to revascularization strategy. We sought to compare the 3‐year clinical outcomes of patients with ST‐segment‐elevation myocardial infarction multivessel disease with cardiogenic shock and patients with multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and infarct‐related artery (IRA)–only PCI. METHODS AND RESULTS: Of 13 104 patients from the nationwide, multicenter, prospective KAMIR‐NIH (Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry––National Institutes of Health) registry, we selected 659 patients with ST‐segment‐elevation myocardial infarction who had concomitant non‐IRA stenosis and presented with cardiogenic shock. The primary outcome was all‐cause death. Multivessel PCI was performed in 260 patients and IRA‐only PCI in 399 patients. At 3 years, patients in the multivessel PCI group had a lower risk of all‐cause death (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.45–0.94 [P=0.024]), all‐cause death or MI (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.41–0.84 [P=0.004]), and non‐IRA repeat revascularization (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.10–0.50 [P<0.001]) than those in the IRA‐only PCI group. The results were consistent after confounder adjustment by propensity score matching and inverse probability weighting analysis. Landmark analysis at 1 year demonstrated that the multivessel PCI group had a lower risk of recurrent MI and non‐IRA repeat revascularization beyond 1 year (log‐rank P=0.030 and P=0.017, respectively) than the IRA‐only PCI group. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with ST‐segment‐elevation myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock, multivessel PCI was associated with a lower risk of all‐cause death than IRA‐only PCI at 3 years, suggesting potential benefit of non‐IRA revascularization during the index hospitalization to improve long‐term clinical outcomes. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-12-10 /pmc/articles/PMC6951086/ /pubmed/31818215 http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.119.013870 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Original Research
Lee, Joo Myung
Rhee, Tae‐Min
Kim, Hyun Kuk
Hwang, Doyeon
Lee, Seung Hun
Choi, Ki Hong
Kim, Jihoon
Park, Taek Kyu
Yang, Jeong Hoon
Song, Young Bin
Choi, Jin‐Ho
Choi, Seung‐Hyuk
Koo, Bon‐Kwon
Chae, Shung Chull
Cho, Myeong‐Chan
Kim, Chong Jin
Kim, Ju Han
Kim, Hyo‐Soo
Gwon, Hyeon‐Cheol
Jeong, Myung Ho
Hahn, Joo‐Yong
Comparison of Long‐Term Clinical Outcome Between Multivessel Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Infarct‐Related Artery–Only Revascularization for Patients With ST‐Segment–Elevation Myocardial Infarction With Cardiogenic Shock
title Comparison of Long‐Term Clinical Outcome Between Multivessel Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Infarct‐Related Artery–Only Revascularization for Patients With ST‐Segment–Elevation Myocardial Infarction With Cardiogenic Shock
title_full Comparison of Long‐Term Clinical Outcome Between Multivessel Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Infarct‐Related Artery–Only Revascularization for Patients With ST‐Segment–Elevation Myocardial Infarction With Cardiogenic Shock
title_fullStr Comparison of Long‐Term Clinical Outcome Between Multivessel Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Infarct‐Related Artery–Only Revascularization for Patients With ST‐Segment–Elevation Myocardial Infarction With Cardiogenic Shock
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Long‐Term Clinical Outcome Between Multivessel Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Infarct‐Related Artery–Only Revascularization for Patients With ST‐Segment–Elevation Myocardial Infarction With Cardiogenic Shock
title_short Comparison of Long‐Term Clinical Outcome Between Multivessel Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Infarct‐Related Artery–Only Revascularization for Patients With ST‐Segment–Elevation Myocardial Infarction With Cardiogenic Shock
title_sort comparison of long‐term clinical outcome between multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention versus infarct‐related artery–only revascularization for patients with st‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6951086/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31818215
http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.119.013870
work_keys_str_mv AT leejoomyung comparisonoflongtermclinicaloutcomebetweenmultivesselpercutaneouscoronaryinterventionversusinfarctrelatedarteryonlyrevascularizationforpatientswithstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionwithcardiogenicshock
AT rheetaemin comparisonoflongtermclinicaloutcomebetweenmultivesselpercutaneouscoronaryinterventionversusinfarctrelatedarteryonlyrevascularizationforpatientswithstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionwithcardiogenicshock
AT kimhyunkuk comparisonoflongtermclinicaloutcomebetweenmultivesselpercutaneouscoronaryinterventionversusinfarctrelatedarteryonlyrevascularizationforpatientswithstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionwithcardiogenicshock
AT hwangdoyeon comparisonoflongtermclinicaloutcomebetweenmultivesselpercutaneouscoronaryinterventionversusinfarctrelatedarteryonlyrevascularizationforpatientswithstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionwithcardiogenicshock
AT leeseunghun comparisonoflongtermclinicaloutcomebetweenmultivesselpercutaneouscoronaryinterventionversusinfarctrelatedarteryonlyrevascularizationforpatientswithstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionwithcardiogenicshock
AT choikihong comparisonoflongtermclinicaloutcomebetweenmultivesselpercutaneouscoronaryinterventionversusinfarctrelatedarteryonlyrevascularizationforpatientswithstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionwithcardiogenicshock
AT kimjihoon comparisonoflongtermclinicaloutcomebetweenmultivesselpercutaneouscoronaryinterventionversusinfarctrelatedarteryonlyrevascularizationforpatientswithstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionwithcardiogenicshock
AT parktaekkyu comparisonoflongtermclinicaloutcomebetweenmultivesselpercutaneouscoronaryinterventionversusinfarctrelatedarteryonlyrevascularizationforpatientswithstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionwithcardiogenicshock
AT yangjeonghoon comparisonoflongtermclinicaloutcomebetweenmultivesselpercutaneouscoronaryinterventionversusinfarctrelatedarteryonlyrevascularizationforpatientswithstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionwithcardiogenicshock
AT songyoungbin comparisonoflongtermclinicaloutcomebetweenmultivesselpercutaneouscoronaryinterventionversusinfarctrelatedarteryonlyrevascularizationforpatientswithstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionwithcardiogenicshock
AT choijinho comparisonoflongtermclinicaloutcomebetweenmultivesselpercutaneouscoronaryinterventionversusinfarctrelatedarteryonlyrevascularizationforpatientswithstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionwithcardiogenicshock
AT choiseunghyuk comparisonoflongtermclinicaloutcomebetweenmultivesselpercutaneouscoronaryinterventionversusinfarctrelatedarteryonlyrevascularizationforpatientswithstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionwithcardiogenicshock
AT koobonkwon comparisonoflongtermclinicaloutcomebetweenmultivesselpercutaneouscoronaryinterventionversusinfarctrelatedarteryonlyrevascularizationforpatientswithstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionwithcardiogenicshock
AT chaeshungchull comparisonoflongtermclinicaloutcomebetweenmultivesselpercutaneouscoronaryinterventionversusinfarctrelatedarteryonlyrevascularizationforpatientswithstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionwithcardiogenicshock
AT chomyeongchan comparisonoflongtermclinicaloutcomebetweenmultivesselpercutaneouscoronaryinterventionversusinfarctrelatedarteryonlyrevascularizationforpatientswithstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionwithcardiogenicshock
AT kimchongjin comparisonoflongtermclinicaloutcomebetweenmultivesselpercutaneouscoronaryinterventionversusinfarctrelatedarteryonlyrevascularizationforpatientswithstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionwithcardiogenicshock
AT kimjuhan comparisonoflongtermclinicaloutcomebetweenmultivesselpercutaneouscoronaryinterventionversusinfarctrelatedarteryonlyrevascularizationforpatientswithstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionwithcardiogenicshock
AT kimhyosoo comparisonoflongtermclinicaloutcomebetweenmultivesselpercutaneouscoronaryinterventionversusinfarctrelatedarteryonlyrevascularizationforpatientswithstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionwithcardiogenicshock
AT gwonhyeoncheol comparisonoflongtermclinicaloutcomebetweenmultivesselpercutaneouscoronaryinterventionversusinfarctrelatedarteryonlyrevascularizationforpatientswithstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionwithcardiogenicshock
AT jeongmyungho comparisonoflongtermclinicaloutcomebetweenmultivesselpercutaneouscoronaryinterventionversusinfarctrelatedarteryonlyrevascularizationforpatientswithstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionwithcardiogenicshock
AT hahnjooyong comparisonoflongtermclinicaloutcomebetweenmultivesselpercutaneouscoronaryinterventionversusinfarctrelatedarteryonlyrevascularizationforpatientswithstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionwithcardiogenicshock
AT comparisonoflongtermclinicaloutcomebetweenmultivesselpercutaneouscoronaryinterventionversusinfarctrelatedarteryonlyrevascularizationforpatientswithstsegmentelevationmyocardialinfarctionwithcardiogenicshock