VIEW AN ABSTRACT

OUTCOMES OF PATIENTS WITH MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION AND CARDIOGENIC SHOCK TREATED WITH CULPRIT VESSEL-ONLY VERSUS MULTIVESSEL PRIMARY PCI.
Topic: Interventional cardiology
Type: Presentation - doctors , Number in the programme: 3

Hlinomaz O.1, Moťovská Z.2, Kala P.3, Hromádka M.4, Přeček J.5, Mrozek J.6, Červinka P.7, Kettner J.8, Matějka J.9, Zahoor A.10, Bis J.11, Jarkovský J.12

1 ICRC, I. interní - kardioangiologická klinika, FN u sv. Anny, Brno, 2 Kardiocentrum, 3. LF, Univerzita Karlova a FN KV, Praha, 3 I. interní - kardioangiologická klinika, FN, Brno, 4 Kardiologická klinika, Fakultní nemocnice a LF Univerzity Karlovy, Plzeň, 5 Kardiologická klinika, FN, Olomouc, 6 Kardiologická klinika, FN, Ostrava, 7 Kardiologie, Masarykova nemocnice, Ústí nad Labem, 8 Kardiologie, IKEM, Praha, 9 Kardiologie, Pardubická nemocnice, Pardubice, 10 Kardiologie, Nemocnice, Karlovy Vary, 11 Kardiologická klinika, FN, Hradec Králové, 12 Biostatistický ústav, LF Masarykovy univerzity, Brno


Introduction and objectives. Multivessel primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) is still often used in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and cardiogenic shock (CS). The study aimed to compare the characteristics and prognosis of patients with CS-STEMI and multivessel coronary disease (MVD) treated with culprit vessel-only pPCI or multivessel pPCI during the initial procedure.
Material and Methods. From 2016 to 2020, 23,703 primary PCI patients with STEMI were included in a national all-comers registry of cardiovascular interventions. From them, a total of 1,213 (5.1%) patients had cardiogenic shock and MVD at admission to the hospital. Initially, 921 (75.9%) patients were treated with CV-pPCI and 292 (24.1%) with MV-pPCI.
Results. Patients with 3-vessel disease and left main disease had a higher probability of being treated with MV-pPCI than patients with 2-vessel disease and patients without left main disease (28.5% vs. 18.6%; p < 0.001 and 37.7% vs. 20.6%; p < 0.001). Mechanical circulatory support systems were more often used in patients with MV-pPCI. 30-day and 1-year all-cause mortality rates were similar in the CV-pPCI and MV-pPCI groups (Odds ratio, 1.01; 95% CI 0.77 to 1.32; p = 0.937 and 1.1; 95% CI 0.84 to 1.44; p = 0.477). The presence of 3-vessel disease and use of ECMO were the strongest adjusted predictors of 30-day and 1-year mortality.
Conclusions. Our data from a large all-comers registry suggest that selective use of MV-pPCI does not increase the all-cause mortality rate in patients with CS-STEMI and MVD in comparison with CV-pPCI.