Key Points
-
Approximately 50% of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) have multivessel disease
-
Whether patients with STEMI and multivessel disease should receive percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of only the culprit vessel or complete revascularization, either in a simultaneous or staged approach, remains uncertain
-
Increasing evidence from randomized controlled trials suggests that multivessel PCI is safe or even beneficial in selected patients, compared with culprit vessel-only PCI
-
Results from adequately-powered randomized controlled trials are still needed to determine the optimal reperfusion strategy in patients with STEMI and multivessel disease
Abstract
Approximately 50% of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) have multivessel disease. The optimal reperfusion strategy in these patients is still uncertain. Whether percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of only the culprit vessel or a strategy of complete revascularization, either in a simultaneous or staged multivessel PCI approach, should be performed remains unclear. Although a large number of observational studies have mostly shown worse clinical outcomes associated with a multivessel PCI approach, increasing evidence from randomized controlled trials suggests that multivessel PCI is safe, while reducing the need for revascularization in selected patients, compared with culprit vessel-only PCI. However, adequately-powered studies are still needed to determine the best treatment strategy in patients with STEMI and multivessel disease, particularly to demonstrate a reduction in the hard end point of death or myocardial infarction. In this Review, we provide a comprehensive summary of current evidence on the different treatment options for patients with STEMI and multivessel disease, highlighting current guideline recommendations and providing future directions on reperfusion strategies in these patients.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Goldstein, J. A. et al. Multiple complex coronary plaques in patients with acute myocardial infarction. N. Engl. J. Med. 343, 915–922 (2000).
Sorajja, P. 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. 28, 1709–1716 (2007).
Park, D. W. et al. Extent, location, and clinical significance of non-infarct-related coronary artery disease among patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction. JAMA 312, 2019–2027 (2014).
Antman, E. M. et al. ACC/AHA guidelines for the management of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction — executive summary. A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to revise the 1999 guidelines for the management of patients with acute myocardial infarction). J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 44, 671–719 (2004).
Boden, W. E. et al. Optimal medical therapy with or without PCI for stable coronary disease. N. Engl. J. Med. 356, 1503–1516 (2007).
Stone, G. W. et al. A prospective natural-history study of coronary atherosclerosis. N. Engl. J. Med. 364, 226–235 (2011).
Fuster, V., Badimon, L., Badimon, J. J. & Chesebro, J. H. The pathogenesis of coronary artery disease and the acute coronary syndromes (1). N. Engl. J. Med. 326, 242–250 (1992).
Falk, E., Shah, P. K. & Fuster, V. Coronary plaque disruption. Circulation 92, 657–671 (1995).
Komukai, K. et al. Effect of atorvastatin therapy on fibrous cap thickness in coronary atherosclerotic plaque as assessed by optical coherence tomography: the EASY-FIT study. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 64, 2207–2217 (2014).
Kubo, T. et al. Multiple coronary lesion instability in patients with acute myocardial infarction as determined by optical coherence tomography. Am. J. Cardiol. 105, 318–322 (2010).
Jang, I. K. et al. In vivo characterization of coronary atherosclerotic plaque by use of optical coherence tomography. Circulation 111, 1551–1555 (2005).
van der Wal, A. C., Becker, A. E., van der Loos, C. M. & Das, P. K. Site of intimal rupture or erosion of thrombosed coronary atherosclerotic plaques is characterized by an inflammatory process irrespective of the dominant plaque morphology. Circulation 89, 36–44 (1994).
Toutouzas, K. et al. Elevated plaque temperature in non-culprit de novo atheromatous lesions of patients with acute coronary syndromes. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 47, 301–306 (2006).
Toutouzas, K. et al. Correlation of systemic inflammation with local inflammatory activity in non-culprit lesions: beneficial effect of statins. Int. J. Cardiol. 119, 368–373 (2007).
Asakura, M. et al. Extensive development of vulnerable plaques as a pan-coronary process in patients with myocardial infarction: an angioscopic study. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 37, 1284–1288 (2001).
Suh, W. M., Seto, A. H., Margey, R. J., Cruz-Gonzalez, I. & Jang, I. K. Intravascular detection of the vulnerable plaque. Circ. Cardiovasc. Imaging 4, 169–178 (2011).
Fuster, V., Badimon, L., Badimon, J. J. & Chesebro, J. H. The pathogenesis of coronary artery disease and the acute coronary syndromes (2). N. Engl. J. Med. 326, 310–318 (1992).
Kubo, T. et al. The dynamic nature of coronary artery lesion morphology assessed by serial virtual histology intravascular ultrasound tissue characterization. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 55, 1590–1597 (2010).
Motreff, P., Rioufol, G. & Finet, G. Seventy-four-month follow-up of coronary vulnerable plaques by serial gray-scale intravascular ultrasound. Circulation 126, 2878–2879 (2012).
Cavender, M. A. et al. 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. 104, 507–513 (2009).
Santos, A. R. et al. Multivessel approach in ST-elevation myocardial infarction: impact on in-hospital morbidity and mortality. Rev. Port. Cardiol. 33, 67–73 (2014).
Jaguszewski, M. et al. Multivessel versus culprit vessel percutaneous coronary intervention in ST-elevation myocardial infarction: is more worse? EuroIntervention 9, 909–915 (2013).
Dziewierz, A. et al. 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. 106, 342–347 (2010).
Khattab, A. A. et al. Multi-vessel stenting during primary percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction. A single-center experience. Clin. Res. Cardiol. 97, 32–38 (2008).
Abe, D. 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 29, 171–177 (2014).
Iqbal, M. B. et al. Culprit vessel versus multivessel intervention at the time of primary percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease: real-world analysis of 3984 patients in London. Circ. Cardiovasc. Qual. Outcomes 7, 936–943 (2014).
Qarawani, D., Nahir, M., Abboud, M., Hazanov, Y. & Hasin, Y. Culprit only versus complete coronary revascularization during primary PCI. Int. J. Cardiol. 123, 288–292 (2008).
Ma, L. X., Lu, Z. H., Wang, L., Du, X. & Ma, C. S. Culprit vessel only versus “one-week” staged percutaneous coronary intervention for multivessel disease in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. J. Geriatr. Cardiol. 12, 226–231 (2015).
Russo, J. J. et al. Safety and efficacy of staged percutaneous coronary intervention during index admission for ST-elevation myocardial infarction with multivessel coronary disease (insights from the University of Ottawa Heart Institute STEMI Registry). Am. J. Cardiol. 116, 1157–1162 (2015).
Lee, H. W. et al. Comparison of infarct-related artery versus multivessel revascularization in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction with multivessel disease: analysis from Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry. Cardiol. J. 19, 256–266 (2012).
Varani, E. et al. Single or multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention in ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients. Catheter. Cardiovasc. Interv. 72, 927–933 (2008).
Corpus, R. A. et al. Multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with multivessel disease and acute myocardial infarction. Am. Heart J. 148, 493–500 (2004).
Kim, M. C. et al. Three-year clinical outcomes of staged, ad hoc and culprit-only percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease. Int. J. Cardiol. 176, 505–507 (2014).
Mohamad, T. et al. Coronary revascularization strategy for ST elevation myocardial infarction with multivessel disease: experience and results at 1-year follow-up. Am. J. Ther. 18, 92–100 (2011).
Chen, H. C. et al. Benefit of revascularization in non-infarct-related artery in multivessel disease patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Int. Heart J. 51, 319–324 (2010).
Toyota, T. et al. Culprit vessel-only versus staged multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention strategies in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Circ. J. 80, 371–378 (2016).
Manari, A. et al. Long-term outcome in patients with ST segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease treated with culprit-only, immediate, or staged multivessel percutaneous revascularization strategies: insights from the REAL registry. Catheter. Cardiovasc. Interv. 84, 912–922 (2014).
Hannan, E. L. 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. 3, 22–31 (2010).
Jensen, L. O. et al. Culprit only or multivessel percutaneous coronary interventions in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease. EuroIntervention 8, 456–464 (2012).
Di Mario, C. et al. Single versus multivessel treatment during primary angioplasty: results of the multicentre randomised HEpacoat for cuLPrit or multivessel stenting for Acute Myocardial Infarction (HELP AMI) Study. Int. J. Cardiovasc. Intervent. 6, 128–133 (2004).
Politi, L. 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 96, 662–667 (2010).
Ghani, A. et al. Treatment of non-culprit lesions detected during primary PCI: long-term follow-up of a randomised clinical trial. Neth. Heart J. 20, 347–353 (2012).
Hlinomaz, O. et al. Multivessel coronary disease diagnosed at the time of primary PCI for STEMI: complete revascularization versus conservative strategy. PRAGUE 13 trial. Presented at European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions; May 19, Paris, France (2015).
Wald, D. S. et al. Randomized trial of preventive angioplasty in myocardial infarction. N. Engl. J. Med. 369, 1115–1123 (2013).
Gershlick, A. H. et al. Randomized trial of complete versus lesion-only revascularization in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention for STEMI and multivessel disease: the CvLPRIT trial. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 65, 963–972 (2015).
Engstrom, T. et al. Complete revascularisation versus treatment of the culprit lesion only in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease (DANAMI-3-PRIMULTI): an open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 386, 665–671 (2015).
Smits, P. C. et al. Fractional flow reserve-guided multivessel angioplasty in myocardial infarction. N. Engl. J. Med. 376, 1234–1244 (2017).
De Bruyne, B. et al. Fractional flow reserve-guided PCI versus medical therapy in stable coronary disease. N. Engl. J. Med. 367, 991–1001 (2012).
Ntalianis, A. et al. Fractional flow reserve for the assessment of nonculprit coronary artery stenoses in patients with acute myocardial infarction. JACC Cardiovasc. Interv. 3, 1274–1281 (2010).
Kornowski, R. 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. 58, 704–711 (2011).
Toma, M. 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. 31, 1701–1707 (2010).
Takagi, H. & Umemoto, T. Multi- versus single-vessel percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction with multi-vessel disease. Int. J. Cardiol. 152, 97–99 (2011).
Lu, C. et al. Complete versus culprit-only revascularization during primary percutaneous coronary intervention in ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients with multivessel disease: a meta-analysis. Kaohsiung J. Med. Sci. 29, 140–149 (2013).
Bagai, A., Thavendiranathan, P., Sharieff, W., Al Lawati, H. A. & Cheema, A. N. 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. 166, 684–693.e1 (2013).
Zhang, D. et al. Culprit vessel only versus multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease. PLoS ONE 9, e92316 (2014).
Rasoul, S. et al. Multivessel revascularisation versus infarct-related artery only revascularisation during the index primary PCI in STEMI patients with multivessel disease: a meta-analysis. Neth. Heart J. 23, 224–231 (2015).
Sethi, A. et al. Complete versus culprit only revascularization in acute ST elevation myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis. Catheter. Cardiovasc. Interv. 77, 163–170 (2011).
Navarese, E. P., De Servi, S., Buffon, A., Suryapranata, H. & De Luca, G. Clinical impact of simultaneous complete revascularization versus culprit only primary angioplasty in patients with st-elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease: a meta-analysis. J. Thromb. Thrombolysis 31, 217–225 (2011).
Moretti, C. et al. Management of multivessel coronary disease in STEMI patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int. J. Cardiol. 179, 552–557 (2015).
Song, Y. J. et al. Preventive versus culprit-only percutaneous coronary intervention in ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients with multivessel disease: a meta-analysis. J. Interv. Cardiol. 28, 1–13 (2015).
Bittl, J. A., Tamis-Holland, J. E., Lang, C. D. & He, Y. Outcomes after multivessel or culprit-vessel intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction in patients with multivessel coronary disease: a Bayesian cross-design meta-analysis. Catheter. Cardiovasc. Interv. 86 (Suppl. 1), S15–S22 (2015).
Chatterjee, S. et al. Is multivessel intervention in ST-elevation myocardial infarction associated with early harm? Insights from observational data. Catheter. Cardiovasc. Interv. 88, 697–707 (2016).
Bangalore, S. et al. 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. 107, 1300–1310 (2011).
Vlaar, P. J. et al. Culprit vessel only versus multivessel and staged percutaneous coronary intervention for multivessel disease in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a pairwise and network meta-analysis. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 58, 692–703 (2011).
Bainey, K. R., Mehta, S. R., Lai, T. & Welsh, R. C. Complete versus culprit-only revascularization for patients with multivessel disease undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am. Heart J. 167, 1–14.e2 (2014).
Tarantini, G. et al. Survival after varying revascularization strategies in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel coronary artery disease: a pairwise and network meta-analysis. JACC Cardiovasc. Interv. 9, 1765–1776 (2016).
Bates, E. R., Tamis-Holland, J. E., Bittl, J. A., O'Gara, P. T. & Levine, G. N. PCI strategies in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel coronary artery disease. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 68, 1066–1081 (2016).
Sekercioglu, N., Spencer, F. A., Lopes, L. C. & Guyatt, G. H. Culprit vessel only versus immediate complete revascularization in patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin. Cardiol. 37, 765–772 (2014).
Dahal, K. et al. Multi-vessel versus culprit-vessel and staged percutaneous coronary intervention in STEMI patients with multivessel disease: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Cardiovasc. Revasc. Med. 15, 408–413 (2014).
Sardar, P. et al. Intervention strategies for multi-vessel disease in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. Int. J. Cardiol. 179, 225–227 (2015).
Sarathy, K. et al. Target-vessel versus multivessel revascularisation in ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis of randomised trials. Heart Lung Circ. 24, 327–334 (2015).
Kowalewski, M. et al. Complete revascularisation in ST-elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Heart 101, 1309–1317 (2015).
Elgendy, I. Y., Wen, X., Mahmoud, A. & Bavry, A. A. Complete versus culprit-only revascularization for patients with multi-vessel disease undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention: an updated meta-analysis of randomized trials. Catheter. Cardiovasc. Interv. 88, 501–505 (2016).
Spencer, F. A., Sekercioglu, N., Prasad, M., Lopes, L. C. & Guyatt, G. H. Culprit vessel versus immediate complete revascularization in patients with ST-segment myocardial infarction — a systematic review. Am. Heart J. 170, 1133–1139 (2015).
Bajaj, N. S. et al. Comparison of approaches to revascularization in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: meta-analyses of randomized control trials. J. Am. Heart Assoc. 4, e002540 (2015).
Bainey, K. R., Welsh, R. C., Toklu, B. & Bangalore, S. Complete versus culprit-only percutaneous coronary intervention in STEMI with multivessel disease: a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized trials. Can. J. Cardiol. 32, 1542–1551 (2016).
Villablanca, P. A. et al. Culprit-lesion only versus complete multivessel percutaneous intervention in ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials. Int. J. Cardiol. 220, 251–259 (2016).
Shah, R. et al. Meta-analysis comparing complete revascularization versus infarct-related only strategies for patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel coronary artery disease. Am. J. Cardiol. 118, 1466–1472 (2016).
Anantha Narayanan, M. et al. What is the optimal approach to a non- culprit stenosis after ST-elevation myocardial infarction — conservative therapy or upfront revascularization? An updated meta-analysis of randomized trials. Int. J. Cardiol. 216, 18–24 (2016).
Pandit, A. et al. Preventive PCI versus culprit lesion stenting during primary PCI in acute STEMI: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Open Heart 1, e000012 (2014).
Briasoulis, A. et al. Culprit-vessel versus complete revascularization during primary angioplasty in ST-elevation myocardial infarction: an updated meta-analysis. Int. J. Cardiol. 178, 171–174 (2015).
Bangalore, S., Toklu, B. & Wetterslev, J. Complete versus culprit-only revascularization for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease: a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized trials. Circ. Cardiovasc. Interv. 8, e002142 (2015).
El-Hayek, G. E. et al. Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing multivessel versus culprit-only revascularization for patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Am. J. Cardiol. 115, 1481–1486 (2015).
Levine, G. N. et al. 2015 ACC/AHA/SCAI focused update on primary percutaneous coronary intervention for patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction: an update of the 2011 ACCF/AHA/SCAI guideline for percutaneous coronary intervention and the 2013 ACCF/AHA guideline for the management of ST-elevation myocardial infarction. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 67, 1235–1250 (2016).
American College of Emergency Physicians et al. 2013 ACCF/AHA guideline for the management of ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 61, e78–e140 (2013).
Marenzi, G. et al. Contrast volume during primary percutaneous coronary intervention and subsequent contrast-induced nephropathy and mortality. Ann. Intern. Med. 150, 170–177 (2009).
Ambrose, J. A. & Weinrauch, M. Thrombosis in ischemic heart disease. Arch. Intern. Med. 156, 1382–1394 (1996).
Barrett, T. D., Hennan, J. K., Marks, R. M. & Lucchesi, B. R. C-Reactive-protein-associated increase in myocardial infarct size after ischemia/reperfusion. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 303, 1007–1013 (2002).
Heusch, G. et al. Coronary microembolization: from bedside to bench and back to bedside. Circulation 120, 1822–1836 (2009).
Roe, M. T. et al. Initial experience with multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention during mechanical reperfusion for acute myocardial infarction. Am. J. Cardiol. 88, 170–173 (2001).
Hanratty, C. G. et al. Exaggeration of nonculprit stenosis severity during acute myocardial infarction: implications for immediate multivessel revascularization. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 40, 911–916 (2002).
Xu, B. et al. Impact of operator experience and volume on outcomes after left main coronary artery percutaneous coronary intervention. JACC Cardiovasc. Interv. 9, 2086–2093 (2016).
Mauri, L. et al. Drug-eluting or bare-metal stents for acute myocardial infarction. N. Engl. J. Med. 359, 1330–1342 (2008).
Kastrati, A. et al. Meta-analysis of randomized trials on drug-eluting stents versus bare-metal stents in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Eur. Heart J. 28, 2706–2713 (2007).
Jeger, R. et al. Acute multivessel revascularization improves 1-year outcome in ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a nationwide study cohort from the AMIS Plus registry. Int. J. Cardiol. 172, 76–81 (2014).
Wiviott, S. D. et al. Prasugrel versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes. N. Engl. J. Med. 357, 2001–2015 (2007).
Wallentin, L. et al. Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes. N. Engl. J. Med. 361, 1045–1057 (2009).
Authors/Task Force Members et al. 2014 ESC/EACTS guidelines on myocardial revascularization: the task force on myocardial revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Developed with the special contribution of the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI). Eur. Heart J. 35, 2541–2619 (2014).
Task Force on the management of ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) et al. ESC Guidelines for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation. Eur. Heart J. 33, 2569–2619 (2012).
Thiele, H. et al. Multivessel versus culprit lesion only percutaneous revascularization plus potential staged revascularization in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: design and rationale of CULPRIT-SHOCK trial. Am. Heart J. 172, 160–169 (2016).
Henriques, J. P. et al. Percutaneous intervention for concurrent chronic total occlusions in patients with STEMI: the EXPLORE Trial. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 68, 1622–1632 (2016).
Barringhaus, K. G. et al. Outcomes from patients with multi-vessel disease following primary PCI: staged PCI imparts very low mortality. Catheter. Cardiovasc. Interv. 77, 617–622 (2011).
US National Library of Medicine. ClinicalTrials.gov https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01180218 (2017).
US National Library of Medicine. ClinicalTrials.gov https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02756000 (2016).
US National Library of Medicine. ClinicalTrials.gov https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01818960 (2016).
US National Library of Medicine. ClinicalTrials.gov https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01740479 (2015).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
B.V. researched data for the article and wrote the manuscript. S.R.M. and R.M. reviewed and edited the manuscript before submission.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing financial interests.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Vogel, B., Mehta, S. & Mehran, R. Reperfusion strategies in acute myocardial infarction and multivessel disease. Nat Rev Cardiol 14, 665–678 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrcardio.2017.88
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrcardio.2017.88
- Springer Nature Limited
This article is cited by
-
RETRACTED ARTICLE: Myocardial ischemia reperfusion injury is alleviated by curcumin-peptide hydrogel via upregulating autophagy and protecting mitochondrial function
Stem Cell Research & Therapy (2021)
-
MiR-708-3p Alleviates Inflammation and Myocardial Injury After Myocardial Infarction by Suppressing ADAM17 Expression
Inflammation (2021)
-
The diagonal branches and outcomes in patients with anterior ST- elevation myocardial infarction
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders (2020)
-
Long noncoding RNA UCA1 from hypoxia-conditioned hMSC-derived exosomes: a novel molecular target for cardioprotection through miR-873-5p/XIAP axis
Cell Death & Disease (2020)
-
Loop isolation-based uploading preconditioning to protect heart from damage: a proof-of-concept study
Herz (2020)