OBJECTIVES There remain conflicting recommendations regarding revascularization strategies for patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) and multivessel disease (MVD). We aimed to compare the long-term outcomes of revascularization strategies.
METHODS Patients with similar characteristics were divided into three groups: immediate complete revascularization (ICR), staged complete revascularization (SCR), and non-complete revascularization group (NCR). The SCR group was divided according to the time interval between the index and staged procedures: SCR ≤ 24 hours and SCR > 24 hours. The cardiac composite outcomes included the total number of cardiac deaths and recurrent myocardial infarction during the follow-up period.
RESULTS 316 of the 14.511 scanned patients were included for analysis. It showed that there was a significant difference in risk between SCR and ICR (HR (95% CI): 0.27 (0.15–0.47); p = 0.001). It showed that there was no significant difference between NCR and SCR (HR (95% CI): 1.06 (0.61–1.84); p = 0.832). The SCR group was divided into two groups according to the time interval from the first procedure to the second procedure (TI ≤ 24 hours in the SCR1 group, and TI > 24 hours in the SCR2 group). The frequency of cardiac composite outcomes was lower in the SCR1 than the SCR2 (%16.7 and %47.1; p = 0.038).
CONCLUSIONS Our study results support the strategy of ICR and SCR completed within 24 hours due to its favorable long-term outcomes in patients with MVD and NSTEMI.
Copyright © 2025 Archives of the Turkish Society of Cardiology