SynthesisCritical pathways in cardiology2026
Staged Versus Immediate Complete Revascularization in Patients With STEMI and Multivessel Disease: An Updated Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials With Trial Sequential Analysis.
Synthesis in Critical pathways in cardiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Complete revascularization improves outcomes in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and multivessel coronary artery disease (MVD); however, the optimal timing of noninfarct-related artery intervention during the index procedure, immediate revascularization (IR) versus a staged approach (SR), remains uncertain. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing SR and IR in patients with STEMI and MVD. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events. Secondary outcomes included all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, recurrent myocardial infarction, unplanned ischemia-driven revascularization, stent thrombosis, stroke, major bleeding, acute kidney injury, and heart failure hospitalization. Random-effects models with Hartung-Knapp adjustment were used. Trial sequential analysis assessed evidence conclusiveness, and the certainty of evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. Eight randomized trials, including 5077 patients (2556 SR; 2521 IR), were analyzed. No significant differences were observed between SR and IR for major adverse cardiovascular events [odds ratios (ORs), 1.07; 95% confidence intervals (CI), 0.76-1.49], recurrent myocardial infarction (OR, 1.30; 95% CI, 0.80-2.14), cardiovascular mortality (OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.51-1.13), or all-cause mortality (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.54-1.06). Rates of stent thrombosis, stroke, unplanned ischemia-driven revascularization, major bleeding, acute kidney injury, and heart failure hospitalization were also comparable. Trial sequential analysis indicated insufficient information size to draw definitive conclusions, and the certainty of evidence ranged from very low to low. In patients with STEMI and MVD, staged and immediate complete revascularization provide comparable ischemic, safety, and mortality outcomes. Current evidence supports clinical equipoise, and revascularization timing should be individualized pending results from adequately powered trials.
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.