Complete vs Culprit-Only Revascularization in Older Patients With Myocardial Infarction With or Without ST-Segment Elevation.

ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction complete revascularization myocardial infarction non–ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction older patients

Journal

Journal of the American College of Cardiology
ISSN: 1558-3597
Titre abrégé: J Am Coll Cardiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8301365

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
25 Aug 2024
Historique:
received: 21 06 2024
revised: 26 07 2024
accepted: 26 07 2024
medline: 1 9 2024
pubmed: 1 9 2024
entrez: 1 9 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

The effectiveness of complete revascularization is well established in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), but it is less investigated in those with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). This study aimed to assess whether complete revascularization, compared with culprit-only revascularization, was associated with consistent outcomes in older patients with STEMI and NSTEMI. In the FIRE (Functional Assessment in Elderly MI Patients with Multivessel Disease) trial, 1,445 older patients with myocardial infarction (MI) were randomized to culprit-only or physiology-guided complete revascularization, stratified by STEMI (n = 256 culprit-only vs n = 253 complete) and NSTEMI (n = 469 culprit-only vs n = 467 complete). The primary outcome comprised a composite of death, MI, stroke, or revascularization at 1 year. The key secondary outcome included a composite of cardiovascular death or MI at 1 year. In the overall study population, physiology-guided complete revascularization reduced both primary and key secondary outcomes. The primary outcome occurred in 54 (21.1%) STEMI patients randomized to culprit-only vs 41 (16.2%) STEMI patients of the complete group (HR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.50-1.13) and in 98 (20.9%) NSTEMI patients randomized to culprit-only vs 72 (15.4%) NSTEMI patients of the complete group (HR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.53-0.97), with negative interaction testing (P for interaction, 0.846). Similarly, no signal of heterogeneity with respect to the initial clinical presentation was observed for the key secondary endpoint (P for interaction, 0.654). Physiology-guided complete revascularization, compared with culprit-only revascularization, provided consistent benefit across the whole spectrum of patients with MI. (FIRE [Functional Assessment in Elderly MI Patients With Multivessel Disease]; NCT03772743).

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
The effectiveness of complete revascularization is well established in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), but it is less investigated in those with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI).
OBJECTIVES OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to assess whether complete revascularization, compared with culprit-only revascularization, was associated with consistent outcomes in older patients with STEMI and NSTEMI.
METHODS METHODS
In the FIRE (Functional Assessment in Elderly MI Patients with Multivessel Disease) trial, 1,445 older patients with myocardial infarction (MI) were randomized to culprit-only or physiology-guided complete revascularization, stratified by STEMI (n = 256 culprit-only vs n = 253 complete) and NSTEMI (n = 469 culprit-only vs n = 467 complete). The primary outcome comprised a composite of death, MI, stroke, or revascularization at 1 year. The key secondary outcome included a composite of cardiovascular death or MI at 1 year.
RESULTS RESULTS
In the overall study population, physiology-guided complete revascularization reduced both primary and key secondary outcomes. The primary outcome occurred in 54 (21.1%) STEMI patients randomized to culprit-only vs 41 (16.2%) STEMI patients of the complete group (HR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.50-1.13) and in 98 (20.9%) NSTEMI patients randomized to culprit-only vs 72 (15.4%) NSTEMI patients of the complete group (HR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.53-0.97), with negative interaction testing (P for interaction, 0.846). Similarly, no signal of heterogeneity with respect to the initial clinical presentation was observed for the key secondary endpoint (P for interaction, 0.654).
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
Physiology-guided complete revascularization, compared with culprit-only revascularization, provided consistent benefit across the whole spectrum of patients with MI. (FIRE [Functional Assessment in Elderly MI Patients With Multivessel Disease]; NCT03772743).

Identifiants

pubmed: 39217557
pii: S0735-1097(24)07984-1
doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2024.07.028
pii:
doi:

Banques de données

ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT03772743']

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Funding Support and Author Disclosures Sahajanand Medical Technologies Ltd (SMT), Medis Medical Imaging Systems, Eukon S.r.l., Siemens Healthineers, General Electric (GE) Healthcare, and Insight Lifetech provided unrestricted funding to the study sponsor for the conduction of the trial. These companies had no involvement in the trial design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing of the manuscript. Dr Campo has received research grants and personal fees from Abbott Vascular, GADA, Menarini, Amgen, Daichi-Sankyo, and Sanofi, outside the submitted work. Dr Moreno has received speaker/consulting fees from Abbott Vascular, AMGEN, AstraZeneca, Biosensors, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Daiichi-Sankyo, Edwards, Medtronic, and Philips, outside the submitted work. Dr Biscaglia has received funding from the Italian Health Minister (Ricerca Finalizzata 2021, GR-2021-12372516) for the conduction of the Functional Coronary Angiography Guided Revascularization in STEMI trial; and has received personal fees from Abbott Vascularand Siemens Healthcare, outside the submitted work. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose.

Auteurs

Marta Cocco (M)

Cardiology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy.

Gianluca Campo (G)

Cardiology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy. Electronic address: cmpglc@unife.it.

Vincenzo Guiducci (V)

Cardiology Unit, Azienda USL-IRCCS Reggio Emilia, S. Maria Nuova Hospital, Reggio Emilia, Italy.

Gianni Casella (G)

Cardiology Unit, Ospedale Maggiore, Bologna, Italy.

Caterina Cavazza (C)

Cardiovascular Department, Infermi Hospital, Rimini, Italy.

Enrico Cerrato (E)

Interventional Cardiology Unit, San Luigi Gonzaga University Hospital, Orbassano, and Rivoli Infermi Hospital ASLTO3, Rivoli, Turin, Italy.

Giorgio Sacchetta (G)

Cardiology Unit, Umberto I Hospital, ASP Siracusa, Siracusa, Italy.

Raul Moreno (R)

Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red en Enfermedades Cardiovasculares (CIBERCV), Madrid, Spain, Instituto de Investigación Hospital La Paz (IDIPAZ), University Hospital La Paz, Madrid, Spain.

Alberto Menozzi (A)

S.C. Cardiologia, Ospedale Sant'Andrea, La Spezia, Italy.

Ignacio Amat Santos (I)

Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red en Enfermedades Cardiovasculares (CIBERCV), Cardiology Department, Hospital Clínico Universitario, Valladolid, Spain.

José Luis Díez Gil (JL)

Centro de Investigation Biomedica end Red en Enfermedades Cardiovasculares, Cardiology Department, H. Universitario y Politécnico La Fe, Valencia, Spain.

Roberto Scarsini (R)

Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Integrata di Verona, Verona, Italy.

Andrea Picchi (A)

Cardiovascular Department, Azienda Unità Sanitaria Locale (USL) Toscana Sud-Est, Misericordia Hospital, Grosseto, Italy.

Giuseppe Vadalà (G)

Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Policlinico Paolo Giaccone, Palermo, Italy.

Gerlando Pilato (G)

Department of Interventional Cardiology, San Giovanni Di Dio Hospital, Agrigento, Italy.

Iginio Colaiori (I)

Cardiology Unit, Ospedale Santa Maria Goretti, Latina, Italy.

Marco Barbierato (M)

Interventional Cardiology, Department of Cardio-Thoracic and Vascular Sciences, Ospedale dell'Angelo, Mestre, Venice, Italy.

Manfredi Arioti (M)

Ospedale Santa Maria delle Croci, ASL Romagna, Ravenna, Italy.

Rita Pavasini (R)

Cardiology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy.

Valerio Lanzilotti (V)

Cardiology Unit, Ospedale Maggiore, Bologna, Italy.

Mila Menozzi (M)

Cardiovascular Department, Infermi Hospital, Rimini, Italy.

Ferdinando Varbella (F)

Interventional Cardiology Unit, San Luigi Gonzaga University Hospital, Orbassano, and Rivoli Infermi Hospital ASLTO3, Rivoli, Turin, Italy.

Andrea Erriquez (A)

Cardiology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy.

Simone Biscaglia (S)

Cardiology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria di Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy.

Classifications MeSH