Complete myocardial revascularization confers a larger clinical benefit when performed with state‐of‐the‐art techniques in high‐risk patients with multivessel coronary artery disease: A meta‐analysis of randomized and observational studies

Abstract

In MVCAD, as compared with IR, CR confers a clinical benefit that seems larger in cohorts of patients enrolled in more recent studies and with a higher prevalence of diabetes. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Impact of complete revascularization in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction

“…Despite our wide inclusion time and real-world population, the significantly lower rate of MACE 1 and 2 years in the CR group is in accordance with the latest randomized trials, CvLPRIT and PRAMI [15,16], and a recent meta-analysis [20][21][22].…”

2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization

“…A more recent meta-analysis suggested enhanced benefit when complete revascularization is performed with state-of-the-art techniques in high-risk patients. 133 Likewise, in a post hoc analysis of the SYNTAX trial, anatomical incomplete revascularization was associated with inferior long-term outcomes after both CABG and PCI. 131 A residual SYNTAX score >8 after PCI was associated with significant increases in the 5-year risk of death and of the composite of death, MI, and stroke, and any residual SYNTAX score >0 was associated with the risk of repeat intervention.…”

Complete versus incomplete revascularization with drug‐eluting stents for multi‐vessel disease in stable, unstable angina or non‐ST‐segment elevation myocardial infarction: A meta‐analysis

“…Study by Zimarino et al compared clinical outcomes of CR versus IR using either BMS or DES in MVD without STEMI. They reported similar outcomes to study by Garcia et al, favoring CR in both PCI and coronary artery bypass graft; however, they did not distinguish results between BMS and DES . Most recently, Nagaraja et al published a meta‐analysis of CR versus IR in MVD without STEMI with both DES and BMS.…”

“…However, patients who presented with acute coronary syndromes did not benefit from CR . Moreover, sub‐group analysis based on stent type (DES or BMS) was not reported in these studies …”

“…Zimarino et al reported in their meta‐analysis that CR was also associated with better clinical outcomes. However, their meta‐analysis included a heterogeneous population with both drug‐eluting stents (DES) and bare‐metal stents (BMS) …”