SynthesisJournal of the American Heart Association2017
Optimal Timing of Complete Revascularization in Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Impact of Immediate Versus Staged Complete Revascularization on Short-Term and Long-Term Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome and Multivessel Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Clinical cardiology · 2024Pooled it
- Network Meta-Analysis of Percutaneous Intervention-Based Revascularization Strategies for ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction and Concomitant Multi-Vessel Disease.Cardiovascular revascularization medicine : including molecular interventions · 2019Pooled it
- Clinical outcomes of complete revascularization using either angiography-guided or fractional flow reserve-guided drug-eluting stent implantation in non-culprit vessels in ST elevation myocardial infarction patients: insights from a study based on a systematic review and meta-analysis.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2018Pooled it
- Culprit versus Complete Revascularization during the Initial Intervention in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome Using a Virtual Treatment Planning Tool: Results of a Single-Center Pilot Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Trial
- Revascularization Strategies for Multivessel Disease in Acute Coronary Syndrome: Network Meta-analysis.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2025Review
- Optimal Timing of Angiography-Guided Complete Revascularization of Non-Culprit Lesions in STEMI Patients with Multivessel Disease.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Review
- Complete revascularization in acute myocardial infarction: a clinical review.Cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics · 2023Review
- The Reduction of Left Ventricle Ejection Fraction after Multi-Vessel PCI during Acute Myocardial Infarction as a Predictor of Major Adverse Cardiac Events in Long-Term Follow-Up.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Immediate versus staged revascularisation of non-culprit arteries in patients with acute coronary syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation · 2022Review
- Association of coronary angiographic lesions and mortality in patients over 80 years with NSTEMI.Open heart · 2022Article
- Factors Associated with the Prognosis of Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction and Cardiogenic Shock.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2021Article
- Prognosis evaluation of universal acute coronary syndrome: the interplay between SYNTAX score and ApoB/ApoA1.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2020Article
- Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor attenuates myocardial remodeling and ventricular arrhythmia susceptibility via the JAK2-STAT3 pathway in a rabbit model of coronary microembolization.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2020Article
- Comparison short time discharge with long time discharge following uncomplicated percutaneous coronary intervention for Non-ST elevation myocardial infarction patients.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2019Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStudies have suggested that complete revascularization is superior to culprit-only revascularization for the treatment of enzyme-positive acute coronary syndrome. However, the optimal timing of complete revascularization remains unclear. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing single-stage complete revascularization with multistage percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction or non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction with multivessel disease. METHODS AND
resultsWe systematically searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, PubMed, and MEDLINE for randomized controlled trials comparing single-stage complete revascularization with multistage revascularization in patients with enzyme-positive acute coronary syndrome. The primary outcome was the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events at longest follow-up. Data were pooled using DerSimonian and Laird random-effects models. Four randomized controlled trials (n=838) were included in our meta-analysis. The risk of unplanned repeat revascularization at longest follow-up was significantly lower in patients randomized to single-stage complete revascularization (risk ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.47-0.99). Results also suggest a trend towards lower risks of major adverse cardiovascular events for patients randomized to single-stage revascularization at 6 months (risk ratio, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.40-1.11) and at longest follow-up (risk ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.52-1.20). Risks of mortality and recurrent myocardial infarction at longest follow-up were also lower with single-stage revascularization, but 95% CIs were wide and included unity.
conclusionsOur results suggest that single-stage complete revascularization is safe. There also appears to be a trend towards lower long-term risks of mortality and major adverse cardiovascular events; however, additional randomized controlled trials are required to confirm the potential benefits of single-stage multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.