Impact of percutaneous coronary intervention on chronic total occlusion in the non-infarct-related artery in patients with STEMI: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The role of chronic total occlusions in non-infarct-related arteries in acute coronary syndrome patients: a systematic review

Aim: This systematic review evaluated the impact of a chronic total occlusion (CTO) in a non-infarct-related artery (non-IRA) on clinical outcomes in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients and assessed the benefits of staged revascularization.Methods: We performed a comprehensive systematic review to provide further insight into the impact of a CTO in a non-IRA on clinical outcomes after ACS. Moreover, we review the currently available evidence on the clinical significance of staged revascularization for a CTO in a non-IRA patients with ACS and propose whether prophylactic CTO percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) could improve outcomes in patients who subsequently develop an ACS.Results: Our search identified 999 studies, from which 30 were selected and ten were included in the analysis. The results showed a trend of higher all-cause mortality and major adverse cardiac event rates in the culprit-only-PCI group compared with the multivessel (MV)-PC I group in ST elevation myocardial infarction patients, with varying statistical significance across different outcomes.Conclusion: This review highlights the significant impact of non-IRA CTOs in ACS. Successful CTO revascularization may provide benefits, particularly in ST elevation myocardial infarction, but the optimal management approach remains uncertain. The presence of a non-IRA CTO, especially in cardiogenic shock, predicts worse outcomes. Further research is warranted to determine the effective strategies to improve survival.

Updated Strategies in Non-Culprit Stenosis Management of Multivessel Coronary Disease-A Contemporary Review

The prevalence of multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients underscores the need for optimal revascularization strategies. The ongoing debate surrounding percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), hybrid interventions, or medical-only management adds complexity to decision-making, particularly in specific angiographic scenarios. The article critically reviews existing literature, providing evidence-based perspectives on non-culprit lesion revascularization in ACS. Emphasis is placed on nuances such as the selection of revascularization methods, optimal timing for interventions, and the importance of achieving completeness in revascularization. The debate between culprit-only revascularization and complete revascularization is explored in detail, focusing on ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), including patients with cardiogenic shock. Myocardial revascularization guidelines and recent clinical trials support complete revascularization strategies, either during the index primary PCI or within a short timeframe following the culprit lesion PCI (in both STEMI and NSTEMI). The article also addresses the complexities of decision-making in NSTEMI patients with multivessel CAD, advocating for immediate multivessel PCI unless complex coronary lesions require a staged revascularization approach. Finally, the article provided contemporary data on chronic total occlusion revascularization in ACS patients, highlighting the prognostic impact. In conclusion, the article addresses the evolving challenges of managing multivessel CAD in ACS patients, enhancing thoughtful integration into the clinical practice of recent data. We provided evidence-based, individualized approaches to optimize short- and long-term outcomes. The ongoing refinement of clinical and interventional strategies for non-culprit lesion management remains dynamic, necessitating careful consideration of patient characteristics, coronary stenosis complexity, and clinical context.