Complete Versus Culprit only Revascularisation in Patients with Cardiogenic Shock Complicating Acute Myocardial Infarction: Incidence and Outcomes from the London Heart Attack Group
Highlights
- • Patients with Cardiogenic Shock (CS) presenting with STEMI still have high mortality rates.
- • This study aimed to assess the trends in management of CS patients with multi-vessel disease (MVD), particularly looking at the incidence and outcomes of complete revascularisation compared to culprit vessel only.
- • This was an observational study of 21,210 STEMI patients between 2005 and 2015 at 8 Heart Attack Centres in London, UK.
- • We found that complete revascularisation appears to be associated with better outcomes compared to culprit vessel only intervention.
- • This supports on-going clinical trials in this area and provides further evidence of the association of complete revascularisation in STEMI with good outcomes.
Abstract
Background
Despite advances in technology, patients with Cardiogenic Shock (CS) presenting with ST-segment myocardial infarction (STEMI) still have a poor prognosis with high mortality rates. A large proportion of these patients have multi-vessel coronary artery disease, the treatment of which is still unclear. We aimed to assess the trends in management of CS patients with multi-vessel disease (MVD), particularly looking at the incidence and outcomes of complete revascularisation compared to culprit vessel only.