Cavender, M. A., Rajeswaran, J., Di Paola, L., Houghtaling, P., Kiernan, M. S., Rassi, A. N., Menon, V., Whitlow, P. W., Ellis, S. G., Shishehbor, M. H. Outcomes of Culprit Versus Multivessel PCI in Patients With Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease Presenting With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Shock J Invasive Cardiol. 2013;25(5):218-24.

BACKGROUND: The optimal revascularization strategy in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (MVCAD) who present with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and shock is undefined. We aimed to determine differences in survival among patients with MVCAD presenting with STEMI complicated by shock treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of the infarct-related artery alone (culprit-only PCI) versus multivessel PCI (MVPCI).

METHODS: Patients with MVCAD and STEMI complicated by shock who underwent PCI between January 1, 2002 and May 31, 2010 were identified (n = 199). Differences in survival between patients undergoing culprit-only PCI versus MVPCI were assessed using a multiphase survival model and propensity matching.

RESULTS: MVPCI was used in 22% of patients (n = 43). Patient characteristics were similar in the groups, although more patients treated with MVPCI met the National Cardiovascular Data Registry definition of shock. Death was higher in patients treated with MVPCI at 1 month (27% vs 46%) and 8 years (65% vs 75%; P=.04). The early risk of death was higher in the patients treated with MVPCI when compared to patients treated with culprit-only PCI (coefficient: 0.66 +/- 0.25; P=.009), but not the late risk of death (coefficient: -0.18 +/- 0.58; P=.70). However, in a propensity-matched cohort (n = 64), there were no differences in the risk of death over the early (coefficient: 0.50 +/- 0.37; P=.16) or late phase (P>.90). CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing MVPCI for STEMI-related shock are clinically different than those treated with culprit PCI only; however, after risk adjustment both groups have similar short- and long-term outcomes. Prospective studies are needed to determine the optimal revascularization strategy in this high-risk population.