Fatima Urooj, Khan Safi U, Akanbi Olabisi, Girotra Saket, Opoku-Asare Isaac
Howard University Hospital, United States of America.
West Virginia University, United States of America.
Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2019 Jul;20(7):603-611. doi: 10.1016/j.carrev.2018.08.018. Epub 2018 Aug 28.
In patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and concomitant multi-vessel disease (MVD), primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of the culprit vessel is the preferred reperfusion strategy. However, optimum timing of revascularization for non-culprit artery is unclear. In this Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA), we compared different PCI-based revascularization strategies in STEMI patients with MVD.
11 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were selected using MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL (Inception to September 2017). For all outcomes, median estimate of odds ratio from posterior distribution with corresponding 95% credible interval was calculated. The Surface under the Cumulative Ranking Curve (SUCRA) metric was used to estimate the relative ranking probability of each intervention. Sensitivity analysis was conducted by excluding the RCTs in which the staged intervention was performed after two weeks of the index procedure or post discharge.
In this NMA of 3172 patients, CR-I (instant complete revascularization) was associated with 40% relative risk reduction in all-cause mortality compared with IRA (infarct related artery) [0.60 (0.31-0.89)]. CR-I was superior to CR-S (staged complete revascularization) [0.42 (0.22-0.70)] and IRA [0.50(0.29-0.72)] in reducing the risk of re- infarction. Both CR-I and CR-S significantly reduced the risk of repeat revascularization compared to IRA, whereas the risk of CIN (contrast induced nephropathy) and major bleeding was similar across all interventions. Sensitivity analysis showed, that CR-I was a better strategy compared with CR-S [0.34 (0.12-0.74)] and IRA (0.60 [0.36-0.97]) in reducing all-cause mortality.
In this NMA, CR-I was associated with reduction in all-cause mortality and re- infarction compared with IRA.
在ST段抬高型心肌梗死(STEMI)合并多支血管病变(MVD)的患者中,对罪犯血管进行直接经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)是首选的再灌注策略。然而,非罪犯血管血运重建的最佳时机尚不清楚。在这项贝叶斯网络荟萃分析(NMA)中,我们比较了STEMI合并MVD患者中不同的基于PCI的血运重建策略。
使用MEDLINE、EMBASE和CENTRAL(从创刊至2017年9月)筛选出11项随机对照试验(RCT)。对于所有结局,计算后验分布中比值比的中位数估计值及其相应的95%可信区间。累积排序曲线下面积(SUCRA)指标用于估计每种干预措施的相对排序概率。通过排除在索引手术两周后或出院后进行分期干预的RCT进行敏感性分析。
在这项对3172例患者的NMA中,与梗死相关动脉(IRA)相比,即刻完全血运重建(CR-I)与全因死亡率相对风险降低40%相关[0.60(0.31-0.89)]。在降低再梗死风险方面,CR-I优于分期完全血运重建(CR-S)[0.42(0.22-0.70)]和IRA[0.50(0.29-0.72)]。与IRA相比,CR-I和CR-S均显著降低了再次血运重建风险,而所有干预措施中对比剂肾病(CIN)和大出血风险相似。敏感性分析显示,在降低全因死亡率方面,CR-I是比CR-S[0.34(0.12-0.74)]和IRA(0.60[0.36-0.97])更好的策略。
在这项NMA中,与IRA相比,CR-I与全因死亡率降低和再梗死减少相关。