Multivessel versus Single Vessel Angioplasty in Non-ST Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes: A Systematic Review and Metaanalysis
Open Access
- 17 February 2016
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Public Library of Science (PLoS) in PLOS ONE
- Vol. 11 (2) , e0148756
Abstract
Multivessel disease is common in acute coronary syndrome patients. However, if multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention is superior to culprit-vessel angioplasty has not been systematically addressed. A metaanalysis was conducted including studies that compared multivessel angioplasty with culprit-vessel angioplasty among non-ST elevation ACS patients. Since all studies were observational adjusted estimates of effects were used. Pooled estimates of effects were computed using the generic inverse of variance with a random effects model. Twelve studies were included (n = 117,685). Median age was 64.1 years, most patients were male, 29.3% were diabetic and 36,9% had previous myocardial infarction. Median follow-up was 12 months. There were no significant differences in mortality risk (HR 0.79; 95% CI 0.58 to 1.09; I2 67.9%), with moderate inconsistency. Also, there were no significant differences in the risk of death or MI (HR 0.90; 95% CI 0.69 to 1.17; I2 62.3%), revascularization (HR 0.76; 95% CI 0.55 to 1.05; I2 49.9%) or in the combined incidence of death, myocardial infarction or revascularization (HR 0.83; 95% CI 0.66 to 1.03; I2 70.8%). All analyses exhibited a moderate degree of inconsistency. Subgroup analyses by design reduced the inconsistency of the analyses on death or myocardial infarction, revascularization and death, myocardial infarction or revascularization. There was evidence of publication bias (Egger’s test p = 0.097). Routine multivessel angioplasty in non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome patients with multivessel disease was not superior to culprit-vessel angioplasty. Randomized controlled trials comparing safety and effectiveness of both strategies in this setting are needed.Keywords
This publication has 31 references indexed in Scilit:
- ESC Guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation: The Task Force for the management of acute coronary syndromes (ACS) in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC)European Heart Journal, 2011
- Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analysesEuropean Journal of Epidemiology, 2010
- Contrast-Induced Nephropathy in Patients Undergoing Emergency Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Acute Coronary SyndromeThe American Journal of Cardiology, 2010
- Culprit‐Only or Multivessel Percutaneous Coronary Stenting in Patients with Non‐ST‐Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes: One‐Year Follow‐UpJournal of Interventional Cardiology, 2009
- In Unstable Angina or Non–ST-Segment Acute Coronary Syndrome, Should Patients With Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease Undergo Multivessel or Culprit-Only Stenting?JACC, 2007
- Outcome of Multivessel Coronary Intervention in the Contemporary Percutaneous Revascularization EraThe American Journal of Cardiology, 2006
- Complete versus culprit vessel percutaneous coronary intervention in multivessel disease: A randomized comparisonAmerican Heart Journal, 2004
- Measuring inconsistency in meta-analysesBMJ, 2003
- Interventional versus conservative treatment for patients with unstable angina or non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction: the British Heart Foundation RITA 3 randomised trialThe Lancet, 2002
- Meta-analysis in clinical trialsControlled Clinical Trials, 1986