Remote vessels vs culprit-only angioplasty in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: reinfarction and all-cause mortality

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Background and purpose In ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (MVCAD), remote-vessel percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has been associated with a reduction in the incidence of reinfarction when compared to a culprit-only revascularization strategy. Overall effects on long-term all-cause mortality are still unclear. Methods Between 2008 and 2013, a total of 584 consecutive patients were admitted with STEMI. 535 survived to discharge, from which 302 (56,5%) had MVCAD and were included in the analysis. We stratified the patients according to the revascularization strategy in two groups: culprit-lesion-only PCI and PCI of non-culprit vessels with angiographic significant stenosis. Patients were followed for 8 years. The primary endpoints were reinfarction in any vessel and all-cause death. Secondary endpoints included target vessel failure (TVF) (any repeat revascularization in the index culprit vessel), heart failure (HF) hospitalization and stroke. Results Of the 302 cases, 217 (74.2%) were men and the median age was 63 years. 150 (49.7%) had 2-vessel, 152 (50.3%) had 3-vessel disease and 104 (34.4%) underwent non-culprit vessel PCI. The mean follow-up time was 6.95 (± 2.29) years. Overall, the culprit-lesion-only group was older (median: 66 vs 59.5 years; p < 0.001) and had a lower proportion of smokers (41.9% vs 59.6%; p = 0.003). There were no significant differences between the groups’ other main comorbidities. The culprit-lesion-only group had a shorter hospital stay (median: 7.0 vs 7.5; p = 0.013), despite presenting at higher Killip class (24.4% vs 10.6% in Killip II-IV; p = 0.004). Regarding index PCI, no-reflow phenomenon was more common in the culprit-lesion-only group (7.1% vs 1.0%; p = 0.020), where the use of drug-eluted stents was more prevalent in the remote-vessel PCI group (69.2% vs 47.0%; p = 0.001). There was a higher risk of reinfarction (Adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 2.46; 95% CI [1.12 – 5.38]; p = 0.008) and TVF (Adjusted HR 2.37; 95% CI [1.02 – 5.48]; p = 0.044) in the culprit-lesion-only PCI group after relevant variable adjustment, with no significant differences in all-cause mortality. There were no significant differences in any of the remaining secondary outcomes. Conclusions Randomized trials and successive metanalysis have demonstrated benefit in complete revascularization after STEMI regarding the incidence of reinfarction and cardiovascular death. However, the long term impact on all-cause death is still unclear. This study corroborates the main findings in the literature, while suggesting lack of effect on overall mortality on a long-term follow-up.