Korean Circulation Journal

The Korean Society of Cardiology (대한심장학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Current Status of Coronary Intervention in Patients with ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction and Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease

  • Kim, Min Chul (Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart Center, Chonnam National University Hospital) ;
  • Jeong, Myung Ho (Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart Center, Chonnam National University Hospital) ;
  • Kim, Sang Hyung (Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart Center, Chonnam National University Hospital) ;
  • Hong, Young Joon (Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart Center, Chonnam National University Hospital) ;
  • Kim, Ju Han (Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart Center, Chonnam National University Hospital) ;
  • Ahn, Youngkeun (Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart Center, Chonnam National University Hospital)
  • Published : 2014.03.30
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is a standard interventional treatment modality for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Diagnostic coronary angiogram during PCI reveals multivessel coronary artery disease in about half of patients with STEMI, and it is difficult to make decision on the extent of intervention in these patients. Although revascularization for the infarct-related artery only is still effective for STEMI patients, several studies have reported the efficacy of multivessel revascularization during primary PCI, as well as in a staged PCI procedure. Clinicians should consider clinical aspects such as initial cardiogenic shock and myocardial viability when performing primary multivessel intervention, including the risks and benefits of multivessel revascularization in patients undergoing primary PCI. This review describes the current status of performing multivessel PCI in patients with STEMI and proposes an optimal revascularization strategy based on the previous literature.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

Supported by : National Research Foundation of Korea, Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

References

  1. Brener SJ, Milford-Beland S, Roe MT, et al. Culprit-only or multivessel revascularization in patients with acute coronary syndromes: an American College of Cardiology National Cardiovascular Database Registry report. Am Heart J 2008;155:140-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ahj.2007.09.007
  2. Claessen BE, Dangas GD, Weisz G, et al. Prognostic impact of a chronic total occlusion in a non-infarct-related artery in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: 3-year results from the HORIZONS- AMI trial. Eur Heart J 2012;33:768-75. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehr471
  3. Sorajja P, Gersh BJ, Cox DA, et al. Impact of multivessel disease on reperfusion success and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J 2007;28:1709-16. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehm184
  4. Biondi-Zoccai G, Lotrionte M, Sheiban I. Management of multivessel coronary disease after ST-elevation myocardial infarction treated by primary coronary angioplasty. Am Heart J 2010;160(6 Suppl):S28-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ahj.2010.10.013
  5. Corpus RA, House JA, Marso SP, et al. Multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with multivessel disease and acute myocardial infarction. Am Heart J 2004;148:493-500. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ahj.2004.03.051
  6. Parodi G, Memisha G, Valenti R, et al. Five year outcome after primary coronary intervention for acute ST elevation myocardial infarction: results from a single centre experience. Heart 2005;91:1541-4. https://doi.org/10.1136/hrt.2004.054692
  7. Widimsky P, Holmes DR Jr. How to treat patients with ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction and multi-vessel disease? Eur Heart J 2011; 32:396-403. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehq410
  8. Levine GN, Bates ER, Blankenship JC, et al. 2011 ACCF/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines and the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions. Circulation 2011;124:e574-651. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIR.0b013e31823ba622
  9. Task Force on Myocardial Revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS); European Association for Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI), Wijns W, et al. Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur Heart J 2010;31:2501-55. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehq277
  10. Roe MT, Cura FA, Joski PS, et al. Initial experience with multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention during mechanical reperfusion for acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol 2001;88:170-3, A6. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9149(01)01615-0
  11. Toma M, Buller CE, Westerhout CM, et al. Non-culprit coronary artery percutaneous coronary intervention during acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: insights from the APEX-AMI trial. Eur Heart J 2010;31:1701-7. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehq129
  12. Dziewierz A, Siudak Z, Rakowski T, Zasada W, Dubiel JS, Dudek D. Impact of multivessel coronary artery disease and noninfarct-related artery revascularization on outcome of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction transferred for primary percutaneous coronary intervention (from the EUROTRANSFER Registry). Am J Cardiol 2010; 106:342-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2010.03.029
  13. Hannan EL, Samadashvili Z, Walford G, et al. Culprit vessel percutaneous coronary intervention versus multivessel and staged percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients with multivessel disease. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2010;3: 22-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2009.10.017
  14. Cavender MA, Milford-Beland S, Roe MT, Peterson ED, Weintraub WS, Rao SV. Prevalence, predictors, and in-hospital outcomes of non-infarct artery intervention during primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry). Am J Cardiol 2009;104:507-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2009.04.016
  15. Vlaar PJ, Mahmoud KD, Holmes DR Jr, et al. Culprit vessel only versus multivessel and staged percutaneous coronary intervention for mul tivessel disease in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a pairwise and network meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011;58:692-703. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2011.03.046
  16. Qarawani D, Nahir M, Abboud M, Hazanov Y, Hasin Y. Culprit only versus complete coronary revascularization during primary PCI. Int J Cardiol 2008;123:288-92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2006.12.013
  17. Rigattieri S, Biondi-Zoccai G, Silvestri P, et al. Management of multivessel coronary disease after ST elevation myocardial infarction treated by primary angioplasty. J Interv Cardiol 2008;21:1-7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-8183.2007.00317.x
  18. Varani E, Balducelli M, Aquilina M, et al. Single or multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention in ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2008;72:927-33. https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.21722
  19. Politi L, Sgura F, Rossi R, et al. A randomised trial of target-vessel versus multi-vessel revascularisation in ST-elevation myocardial infarction: major adverse cardiac events during long-term follow-up. Heart 2010;96:662-7. https://doi.org/10.1136/hrt.2009.177162
  20. Bangalore S, Kumar S, Poddar KL, Ramasamy S, Rha SW, Faxon DP. Meta- analysis of multivessel coronary artery revascularization versus culprit- only revascularization in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease. Am J Cardiol 2011;107: 1300-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2010.12.039
  21. Wald DS, Morris JK, Wald NJ, et al. Randomized trial of preventive angioplasty in myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 2013;369:1115-23. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1305520
  22. Jo HS, Park JS, Sohn JW, et al. 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. Korean Circ J 2011;41:718-25. https://doi.org/10.4070/kcj.2011.41.12.718
  23. Lee HW, Hong TJ, Yang MJ, et al. Comparison of infarct-related artery vs multivessel revascularization in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction with multivessel disease: analysis from Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry. Cardiol J 2012;19:256-66. https://doi.org/10.5603/CJ.2012.0047
  24. Kornowski R, Mehran R, Dangas G, et al. Prognostic impact of staged versus "one-time" multivessel percutaneous intervention in acute myocardial infarction: analysis from the HORIZONS-AMI (harmonizing outcomes with revascularization and stents in acute myocardial infarction) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 20119;58:704-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2011.02.071
  25. Jensen LO, Thayssen P, Farkas DK, et al. Culprit only or multivessel percutaneous coronary interventions in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease. EuroIntervention 2012;8:456-64. https://doi.org/10.4244/EIJV8I4A72
  26. Kelly DJ, McCann GP, Blackman D, et al. Complete Versus culprit-Lesion only PRimary PCI Trial (CVLPRIT): a multicentre trial testing management strategies when multivessel disease is detected at the time of primary PCI: rationale and design. EuroIntervention 2013;8:1190-8. https://doi.org/10.4244/EIJV8I10A183
  27. Bengtson JR, Kaplan AJ, Pieper KS, et al. Prognosis in cardiogenic shock after acute myocardial infarction in the interventional era. J Am Coll Cardiol 1992;20:1482-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/0735-1097(92)90440-X
  28. Fokkema ML, Vlaar PJ, Svilaas T, et al. Incidence and clinical consequences of distal embolization on the coronary angiogram after percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J 2009;30:908-15.
  29. Hochman JS, Lamas GA, Buller CE, et al. Coronary intervention for persistent occlusion after myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 2006;355: 2395-407. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa066139
  30. Bauer T, Zeymer U, Hochadel M, et al. Use and outcomes of multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock (from the EHS-PCI Registry). Am J Cardiol 2012;109:941-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2011.11.020
  31. Yang JH, Hahn JY, Song PS, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention for nonculprit vessels in cardiogenic shock complicating ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction. Crit Care Med 2014;42:17-25. https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0b013e3182a2701d
  32. Mylotte D, Morice MC, Eltchaninoff H, et al. Primary percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute myocardial infarction, resuscitated cardiac arrest, and cardiogenic shock: the role of primary multivessel revascularization. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2013;6:115-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2012.10.006
  33. Taggart DP, Boyle R, de Belder MA, Fox KA. The 2010 ESC/EACTS guidelines on myocardial revascularisation. Heart 2011;97:445-6. https://doi.org/10.1136/hrt.2010.216135
  34. Bagai A, Thavendiranathan P, Sharieff W, Al Lawati HA, Cheema AN. Non-infarct-related artery revascularization during primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am Heart J 2013;166: 684-93.e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ahj.2013.07.027
  35. Abe D, Sato A, Hoshi T, et al. Initial culprit-only versus initial multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: results from the Ibaraki Cardiovascular Assessment Study registry. Heart Vessels 2013. [Epub ahead of print]
  36. Aggarwal V, Rajpathak S, Singh M, Romick B, Srinivas VS. Clinical outcomes based on completeness of revascularisation in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a meta-analysis of multivessel coronary artery disease studies. EuroIntervention 2012;7:1095-102. https://doi.org/10.4244/EIJV7I9A174
  37. Chung JW, Park KH, Lee MH, et al. Benefit of complete revascularization in patients with multivessel coronary disease in the drug-eluting stent era. Circ J 2012;76:1624-30. https://doi.org/10.1253/circj.CJ-11-1285
  38. Vieira RD, Hueb W, Gersh BJ, et al. Effect of complete revascularization on 10-year survival of patients with stable multivessel coronary artery disease: MASS II trial. Circulation 2012;126(11 Suppl 1):S158-63. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.111.084236
  39. Dangas GD, George JC, Weintraub W, Popma JJ. Timing of staged percutaneous coronary intervention in multivessel coronary artery disease. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2010;3:1096-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2010.09.005
  40. Sianos G, Morel MA, Kappetein AP, et al. The SYNTAX Score: an angiographic tool grading the complexity of coronary artery disease. EuroIntervention 2005;1:219-27.
  41. Serruys PW, Morice MC, Kappetein AP, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary-artery bypass grafting for severe coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 2009;360:961-72. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa0804626
  42. Perrone-Filardi P, Pace L, Prastaro M, et al. Dobutamine echocardiography predicts improvement of hypoperfused dysfunctional myocardium after revascularization in patients with coronary artery disease. Circulation 1995;91:2556-65. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.91.10.2556
  43. Gibbons RJ, Araoz PA. The year in cardiac imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;44:1937-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2004.08.050
  44. Petersen SE, Horstick G, Voigtlander T, et al. Diagnostic value of routine clinical parameters in acute myocardial infarction: a comparison to delayed contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Delayed enhancement and routine clinical parameters after myocardial infarction. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2003;19:409-16. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025856816168
  45. Esposito G, Dellegrottaglie S, Chiariello M. The extent of irreversible myocardial damage and the potential for left ventricular repair after primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Am Heart J 2010;160(6 Suppl):S4-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ahj.2010.10.009
  46. Kirschbaum SW, Springeling T, Boersma E, et al. Complete percutaneous revascularization for multivessel disease in patients with impaired left ventricular function: pre- and post-procedural evaluation by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2010;3: 392-400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2010.01.011
  47. Ntalianis A, Trana C, Muller O, et al. Effective radiation dose, time, and contrast medium to measure fractional flow reserve. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2010;3:821-7.
  48. Ntalianis A, Sels JW, Davidavicius G, et al. Fractional flow reserve for the assessment of nonculprit coronary artery stenoses in patients with acute myocardial infarction. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2010;3:1274-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2010.08.025
  49. Pijls NH, Fearon WF, Tonino PA, et al. Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease: 2-year follow-up of the FAME (Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation) study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010;56:177-84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2010.04.012
  50. Fearon WF, Bornschein B, Tonino PA, et al. Economic evaluation of fractional flow reserve-guided percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with multivessel disease. Circulation 2010;122:2545-50. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.109.925396

Cited by

  1. Long-Term Clinical Outcomes of Medical Therapy for Coronary Chronic Total Occlusions in Elderly Patients (75 Years). vol.79, pp.8, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1253/circj.cj-15-0041
  2. Clinical values of left ventricular mechanical dyssynchrony assessment by gated myocardial perfusion SPECT in patients with acute myocardial infarction and multivessel disease vol.44, pp.2, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-016-3542-y