Abstract
The angiographic evidence of coronary multivessel disease (MVD) increases significantly the risk of recurrent ischemic events in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).
Recent evidence suggests that a complete revascularization strategy should be considered the standard of care in these patients and performed for significant non-culprit lesions (NCLs) after careful assessment of the individual risk-benefit ratio. However, the optimal timing and the modality for the assessment of NCLs is not fully standardized.
This brief review aims to summarise the management of MVD in patients with STEMI and to provide an overview of the principal techniques used to guide revascularisation in this high-risk clinical setting.
Keywords: Acute coronary syndrome, Non-culprit lesion, Multivessel disease, Intracoronary imaging, IVUS, OCT, Functional assessment, Coronary computed tomography angiography
1. Introduction
A bout half of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) exhibits coronary multivessel disease (MVD), defined as the presence of two or more epicardial coronary arteries with obstructive luminal narrowing [1]. The angiographic evidence of MVD has achieved increasing clinical interest in the last decades due to the robust evidence of its association with recurrent ischemic events and mortality [2–5].
Current guidelines recommend routine revascularization of non-culprit lesions(NCLs),definedas any coronary lesion not responsible for the acute coronary syndrome (ACS), during the index percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) procedure or within 45 days in haemodynamically stable patients [6].
The decision to perform coronary revascularisation needs to be carefully evaluated against the risks of the procedure and the patient’s comorbidities, especially in the case of complex coronary lesions [7–11].
Therefore, the identification of really significant NCLs is central to the decision-making process. No one technique fits all patients, but the integration of invasive and non-invasive techniques is currently considered the most rational approach by the interventional cardiology community [12,13].
This short review aims to summarise the management of MVD in patients with STEMI and to provide an overview of the techniques used to guide revascularisation decisions.
2. Treatment of non-culprit lesions
Robust evidence of NCLs treatment in patients with ACS and MVD demonstrated the safety and effectiveness of complete revascularization and its value in reducing the risk of long-term adverse events (Table 1) [14–18]. The Preventive Angioplasty in Myocardial Infarction (PRAMI) trial included 465 patients with STEMI and MVD, who were randomized to immediate angiography-guided multivessel complete revascularization versus culprit-only lesion primary PCI [7]. The study demonstrated the benefit of immediate multivessel PCI with a significant reduction of the composite endpoint including cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction or refractory angina at three years follow-up, as compared to culprit-only lesion PCI [14].
Table 1.
Study, years | Sample size | NCLs severity | Primary outcome | Main result |
---|---|---|---|---|
PRAMI, 2013 | 465 | angiographic diameter stenosis >50% | MACE: CV death, non-fatal MI, refractory angina at 23 months FU | Complete multivessel PCI of NCLs was associated with reduced risk of MACE compared to culprit-only PCI |
CvLPRIT, 2015 | 296 | Angiography diameter stenosis >70% or >50% in 2 views | MACE: Death, MI, any repeat revascularization, HF at 12 months FU. | Complete multivessel PCI was associated with lower risk of MACE compared to culprit-only PCI |
DANAMI-3 PRIMULTI, 2015 | 627 | Angiography diameter stenosis >90% or Angiography diameter stenosis >50% and FFR<0.80 | MACE: Death, re-infarction, ischemia-driven revascularization at 27 months FU. | Complete multivessel PCI guided by FFR reduced the risk of MACE compared with no further invasive intervention after primary PCI |
COMPARE-ACUTE, 2017 | 885 | Angiography diameter stenosis>50% and FFR<0.80 | MACE: Death, non-fatal MI, revascularization, cerebrovascular events at 12 months FU | Complete multivessel PCI guided by FFR reduced the risk of MACE compared to culprit-only PCI |
COMPLETE, 2019 | 4041 | Angiography diameter stenosis >70% or angiography diameter stenosis between 50% and 69% and FFR <0.80 | Coprimary outcome 1. Composite of CV death and MI 2. Composite of CV death, MI, and ischemia-driven revascularization at 36 months FU |
Complete multivessel PCI reduced the risk of both coprimary outcome compared to culprit-only PCI |
CV, cardiovascular; FFR, fractional flow reserve; FU, follow-up; HF, heart failure; MI, myocardial infarction; MACE, major adverse cardiac events; MVD, multivessel disease; NCLs, non-culprit lesions; PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention.
Consistently with this study, the Complete versus Lesion-only Primary PCI (CvLPRIT) trial showed a significantly lower risk for the composite of all-cause mortality, recurrent myocardial infarction, heart failure, and ischemia-driven revascularization at one-year follow-up in patients with STEMI and MVD undergoing early angiography-guided complete revascularization compared to culprit-only lesion PCI [15]. Also, the Treatment of Culprit Lesion Only or Complete Revascularization (DANAMI-3 PRIMULTI), the FFR Guided Revascularization Versus Conventional Strategy in Acute STEMI Patients With MVD (COMPARE-ACUTE) and the Complete vs. Culprit-only Revascularization to Treat Multi-vessel Disease After Early PCI for STEMI (COMPLETE) trials demonstrated the benefit of complete revascularization guided by early fractional flow reserve (FFR) or coronary angiography compared to culprit-only lesion primary PCI [16–18].
The mechanisms underlying the association between NCLs and adverse cardiac events are complex and multifactorial. In the acute phase of STEMI, the release of inflammatory substances promotes instability of NCLs and microcirculatory endothelial damage potentially leading to thrombosis, plaque rupture and myocardial ischemia [19–23]. After the acute phase, NCLs may undergo disease progression, especially in patients with multiple and not optimally controlled cardiovascular risk factors such as diabetes, high cholesterol levels, hypertension, smoking, and chronic kidney disease [24–29].
The optimal timing to complete myocardial revascularization is controversial, since some trials treated NCLs during index PCI [14,15] and others planned revascularization in staged procedure [16,18].
The Direct Complete Versus Staged Complete Revascularization in Patients Presenting With Acute Coronary Syndromes and Multivessel Disease (BIO-VASC) trial enrolled 764 patientswith ACS, who were randomized to immediate vs staged complete multivessel PCI. The study showed that complete revascularisation at index PCI was not inferior to staged PCI in terms of the composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, any unplanned ischemia-driven revascularization, or cerebrovascular events. Moreover, immediate complete PCI of NCLs was associated with a reduction in myocardial infarction and unplanned ischaemic-driven revascularisation [30].
Consistently with this study, MULTivessel Immediate versus STAged RevaScularization in Acute Myocardial Infarction (MULTISTARS AMI) trial compared the safety and efficacy of immediate vs staged complete revascularisation in haemodynamically stable patients with STEMI and MVD. The results showed that achieving complete revascularisation during index PCI was not inferior to staged PCI in terms of mortality and ischaemic events [31].
3. Invasive assessment
3.1. Coronary physiology
Although previous studies have demonstrated the potential benefit of invasive functional assessment for PCI guidance in patients with stable ischemic heart disease [32,33], this evidence cannot be extended to patients with ACS.
FFR is the most used technique to evaluate the functional severity of coronary lesions during adenosine-induced hyperemia. Non-hyperaemic pressure ratios (NHPRs) provide an alternative method for evaluating the ratio between distal coronary pressure and aortic pressure across coronary lesions during the wave-free period of the resting cardiac cycle without the need for hyperaemic stimuli [34].
In the acute or subacute phase of ACS, the release of inflammatory mediators, distal embolization, vasoconstriction of microcirculation and increased left ventricular tele-diastolic pressure may promote a transient change in coronary physiology and thus affect measurements of both hyperaemic- and non-hyperaemic-based indexes [35–39].
Two randomized clinical trials investigated the role of complete revascularization guided by invasive functional vs angiography strategy in patients with ACS and MVD (Table 2) [38,40].
Table 2.
Study, years | Sample size | NCLs severity | Primary outcome | Main result |
---|---|---|---|---|
Coronary physiology | ||||
FLOWER-MI, 2021 | 1171 | Angiographic diameter stenosis >50% vs Angiography diameter stenosis >50% and FFR<0.80 | MACE: Death, non-fatal MI, unplanned hospitalization leading to urgent revascularization at 12 months FU | Complete multivessel PCI guided by FFR did not show significant benefit compared to PCI guided by angiography alone |
FRAME-AMI, 2022 | 562 | Angiographic diameter stenosis >50% vs Angiography diameter stenosis >50% and FFR<0.80 | MACE: Death, MI and repeat revascularization, at 41 months FU. | Complete multivessel PCI guided by FFR reduced the risk of MACE compared to PCI guided by angiography alone |
Intravascular imaging | ||||
PROSPECT, 2011 | 697 | Three-vessel IVUS for the assessment of plaque features | MACE: CV death, cardiac arrest, MI, rehospitalization due to unstable or progressive angina at 36 months FU. | The presence of plaque burden ≥70%, TCFA and an MLA ≤4mm2 were independent predictors of MACE |
ATHEROREMO-NIRS, 2014 | 203 | NIRS for the assessment of lipid-rich plaques | MACE: Death, non-fatal MI, stroke, unplanned coronary revascularization at 12 months FU | The presence of lipid-rich plaques was associated with higher risk of MACE |
CLIMA, 2020 | 1003 | OCT for the assessment of plaque features | MACE: cardiac death and target segment myocardial infarction at 12 months FU | MLA<3.5 mm2, fibrous cap thickness <75 μm, lipid arc circumferential extension>180, and macrophage infiltration were associated with a higher risk of MACE |
COMBINE OCT-FFR, 2021 | 550 | OCT detected TCFA in diabetes patients with negative FFR value | MACE: CV death, target vessel MI, clinically driven target lesion revascularization or hospitalization due to unstable or progressive angina at 18 months | The presence of TCFA was associated with higher risk of MACE |
Non-invasive diagnostic tools | ||||
PROMISE, 2018 | 4415 | CCTA for the assessment of high-risk plaque features | MACE: death, myocardial infarction, or unstable angina at 25 months | Positive remodelling, low computed tomographic attenuation, or napkin-ring sign were associated with a higher risk of MACE |
REDUCE-MVI sub-study, 2020 | 77 | Stress perfusion CMR with adenosine Vs FFR<0.80 | The agreement between CMR and invasive FFR in the assessment of NCLs at 1 month | The diagnostic performance of CMR was moderate when compared to invasive FFR assessment |
CCTA, coronary computed tomography angiography; CMR, cardiac magnetic resonance; CV, cardiovascular; FFR, fractional flow reserve; FU, follow-up; IVUS, intravascular ultrasound; MI, myocardial infarction; MACE, major adverse cardiac events; MLA, minimal lumen area; MVD, multivessel disease; NCLs, non-culprit lesions; OCT, Optical coherence tomography; PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention; TFCA, tin-cap fibroatheroma.
The FLOW Evaluation to Guide Revascularization in Multi-vessel ST-elevation Myocardial Infarction (FLOWER-MI) trial enrolled 1171 patients with STEMI and MVD, who were randomized to receive complete revascularization guided by FFR or angiography alone. At one-year, complete revascularization guided by FFR did not show significant benefit compared to revascularization guided by angiography alone [38]. However, the unexpected very low rate of adverse events during follow-up makes the results of this study not conclusive [38]. More recently, the Fractional flow reserve versus angiography-guided strategy in acute myocardial infarction with multivessel disease (FRAME-AMI) trial demonstrated a lower risk of the composite of death, myocardial infarction, or repeat revascularization in patients with ACS and MVD undergoing complete revascularization guided by FFR compared to PCI guided by angiography strategy [40].
Therefore, the implementation of physiology to guide PCI decisions of NCLs remains controversial.
3.2. Intravascular imaging
The assessment of NCLs using intravascular imaging techniques can help to identify plaque characteristics associated with a higher risk of rupture including a high percentage of lipids, necrotic core, and thin fibrous cap (tin-cap fibroatheroma, TCFA), in patients with STEMI and MVD (Table 2) [41–43].
Currently, the main catheter-based imaging techniques are: intravascular ultrasound (IVUS), near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) and optical coherence tomography (OCT).
IVUS is an intravascular coronary imaging technique based on the use of ultrasounds with high penetration depth, which allows the assessment of the plaque burden and of the minimal lumen area (MLA) [42]. The Providing Regional Observations to Study Predictors of Events in the Coronary Tree (PROSPECT) study enrolled 697 patients with ACS, who underwent three-vessel IVUS for the assessment of NCLs. The authors showed that the presence of plaque burden ≥70%, the presence of TCFA and an MLA ≤4 mm [2] were independent predictors of adverse events [19].
The assessment of lipid-rich plaques may be facilitated through NIRS, which is an intravascular coronary imaging technique used to estimate the lipid pool extension in coronary lesions [43,44]. In Near-infrared spectroscopy predicts cardiovascular outcome in patients with coronary artery disease (ATHEROREMO-NIRS) study, lipid-rich plaques were associated with cardiovascular adverse events during follow-up [44]. More recently, NIRS has been implemented in IVUS catheters to evaluate simultaneously the plaque burden and its lipid percentage [43]. Indeed, the high percentage of lipid in coronary lesion and the high plaque burden has been associated with a significantly higher risk of adverse cardiac events [43].
Optical coherence tomography (OCT) is characterized by higher spatial resolution and allows a more accurate estimation of the thickness of TCFA and the detection of plaque components [45]. In the Relationship between coronary plaque morphology of the left anterior descending artery and 12 months clinical outcome (CLIMA) study, the authors investigated the predictive value of specific plaque features identified by OCT. Among 1776 coronary lesions, the presence of MLA<3.5 mm2, fibrous cap thickness <75 μm, lipid arc circumferential extension> 180, and macrophage infiltration were associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular events [46]. Also, in the Thin-cap fibroatheroma predicts clinical events in diabetic patients with normal fractional flow reserve (COMBINE OCT-FFR) trial, the presence of TCFA was associated with poor outcome in diabetic patients with negative FFR [47].
Therefore, intravascular imaging may help to identify characteristics of plaque vulnerability in NCLs and may improve the prognostic stratification in patients with STEMI and MVD. However, the optimal revascularization strategy for patients with vulnerable NCLs remains to be determined.
4. Non-invasive assessment
The timing and the modality for non-invasive evaluation of residual ischemia in patients with NCLs and recent STEMI is still a matter of debate and depends largely on the local availability and expertise [6].
In addition, coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) may be implemented to identify specific features of atherosclerotic plaques such as low-attenuation plaque, napkin-ring sign, positive remodeling and spotty plaque calcification, which are associated with a higher risk of further adverse events (Table 2) [48–51]. Ferencik and colleagues, in a secondary analysis of the PROMISE trial including 4415 patients, showed that high-risk plaques as defined by CCTA were associated with cardiovascular adverse events during follow-up. However, the study showed a low positive predictive value for CCTA which limits its clinical perspectives [52].
Currently, CCTA has been combined with computational fluid dynamics technologies to evaluate simultaneously both anatomical features and functional information of atherosclerotic plaques [53,54].
Lee et al. evaluated the prognostic significance of non-invasive hemodynamic parameters using CCTA in patients with NCLs and recent ACS. The study suggested that integrating non-invasive haemodynamic information with anatomical plaque characterization may improve the identification of NCLs with the highest risk of adverse events [55]. However, the diagnostic accuracy of non-invasive hemodynamic parameters by CCTA for detecting residual ischemia in patients with NCLs and recent ACS was only modest when compared to invasive physiology techniques [56].
Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) is another non-invasive imaging modality that allows simultaneous assessment of left ventricular morphology and function, tissue characterization, and stress myocardial perfusion [57,58].
A recent sub-study from the Reducing Micro Vascular Dysfunction in Acute Myocardial Infarction by Ticagrelor (REDUCE-MVI) trial including 77 patients demonstrated the usefulness of stress perfusion CMR with adenosine for detecting residual ischemia in patients with NCLs and recent ACS. However, the diagnostic performance of this noninvasive technique was moderate when compared to invasive FFR assessment at one month (Table 2) [59].
Currently, the main limitation to the implementation of non-invasive diagnostic tools for the assessment of NCLs in patients with recent STEMI is the modest positive predictive value for the identification of lesions associated with a higher risk of future adverse events compared to invasive techniques [56,59]. However, these methods are virtually risk-free and have the potential to avoid invasive examinations in patients with non-significant NCLs who do not require further coronary revascularization.
Future studies will determine whether non-invasive methods can be employed to guide the decision-making in STEMI patients with MVD.
5. Future perspectives
Currently, the optimal strategy for defining the anatomical and hemodynamic significance of NCLs to guide complete revascularisation decisions in patients with STEMI and coexisting NCLs remains to be determined.
Currently, the application of invasive physiology measurements to guide decisions on PCI of NCLs remains controversial. Therefore, the Physiology-guided vs Angiography-guided Non-culprit Lesion Complete Revascularization for Acute MI & Multivessel Disease (COMPLETE-2) study, a phase 3 trial, will investigate the prognostic role of physiology-guided complete revascularization compared to conventional angiography strategy in patients with MVD and recent ACS.
The Preventive PCI or medical therapy alone for vulnerable atherosclerotic coronary plaque (PREVENT) study will investigate the prognostic impact of preventive PCI in patients with high-risk plaque features quantified by intravascular imaging and negative value of FFR (FFR >0.80), compared to medical therapy alone.
6. Conclusions
In patients with STEMI, the prevalence of MVD is high and modern evidence supports the complete revascularization strategy during the index PCI procedure or at least within the first month to improve the patients’ short- and long-term outcomes [6].
What is the best invasive or non-invasive modality for assessing the clinical relevance of NCLs remains an open question. In daily practice, the assessment of patients’ comorbidities, hemodynamic status and coronary anatomy, together with the experience of the individual center in percutaneous treatment of complex lesions, directs patients toward dedicated pathways of clinical management.
Further evidence from large randomized trials is needed to establish a standardized approach in this complex clinical scenario.
Abbreviations
- ACS
acute coronary syndrome
- CCTA
coronary computed tomography angiography
- CMR
cardiac magnetic resonance
- FFR
fractional flow reserve
- IVUS
intravascular ultrasound
- MLA
minimal lumen area
- MVD
multivessel coronary disease
- NCLs
non-culprit lesions
- NHPRs
non-hyperaemic pressure ratios
- NIRS
near-infrared spectroscopy
- NSTEMI
non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction
- OCT
optical coherence tomography
- PCI
percutaneous coronary intervention
- STEMI
ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction
- TFCA
tin-cap fibroatheroma
Footnotes
Disclosure: None.
Conflicts of interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Sources of funding: None.
References
- 1. Park DW, Clare RM, Schulte PJ, Pieper KS, Shaw LK, Califf RM, et al. Extent, location, and clinical significance of non-infarct-related coronary artery disease among patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction. JAMA. 2014;312:2019–22. doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.15095. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2. Sorajja P, Gersh BJ, Cox DA, McLaughlin MG, Zimetbaum P, et al. Impact of multivessel disease on reperfusion success and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J. 2007;28:1709–16. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehm184. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3. Parodi G, Memisha G, Valenti R, Trapani M, Migliorini A, Santoro GM, et al. Five year outcome after primary coronary intervention for acute ST elevation myocardial infarction: results from a single center experience. Heart. 2005;91:1541–4. doi: 10.1136/hrt.2004.054692. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4. Galasso G, De Angelis E, Silverio A, Di Maio M, Cancro FP, Esposito L, et al. Predictors of recurrent ischemic events in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol. 2021;159:44–51. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2021.08.019. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5. Di Maio M, Esposito L, Silverio A, Bellino M, Cancro FP, De Luca G, et al. Prognostic significance of the SYNTAX score and SYNTAX score II in patients with myocardial infarction treated with percutaneous coronary intervention. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2023 Nov;102(5):779–87. doi: 10.1002/ccd.30842. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6. Byrne RA, Rossello X, Coughlan JJ, Barbato E, Berry C, Chieffo A, et al. ESC Scientific Document Group. 2023 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes. Eur Heart J. 2023 Aug 25; ehad191. [Google Scholar]
- 7. Silverio A, Cancro FP, Esposito L, Bellino M, D’Elia D, Verdoia M, et al. Secondary cardiovascular prevention after acute coronary syndrome: emerging risk factors and novel therapeutic targets. J Clin Med. 2023 Mar 10;12(6):2161. doi: 10.3390/jcm12062161. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8. Silverio A, Di Maio M, Buccheri S, De Luca G, Esposito L, Sarno G, et al. Validation of the academic research consortium high bleeding risk criteria in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 10 studies and 67,862 patients. Int J Cardiol. 2022 Jan 15;347:8–15. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2021.11.015. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9. Baldi C, Silverio A, Esposito L, Di Maio M, Tarantino F, De Angelis E, et al. Clinical outcome of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction and angiographic evidence of coronary artery ectasia. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2022 Feb;99(2):340–7. doi: 10.1002/ccd.29738. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10. Silverio A, Buccheri S, Venetsanos D, Alfredsson J, Lagerqvist B, Persson J, et al. Percutaneous treatment and outcomes of small coronary vessels: a SCAAR report. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2020 Apr 13;13(7):793–804. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2019.10.062. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11. De Luca G, Silverio A, Verdoia M, Siudak Z, Tokarek T, Kite TA, et al. Angiographic and clinical outcome of SARS-CoV-2 positive patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary angioplasty: a collaborative, individual patient data meta-analysis of six registry-based studies. Eur J Intern Med. 2022 Nov;105:69–76. doi: 10.1016/j.ejim.2022.08.021. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12. Bellino M, Silverio A, Esposito L, Cancro FP, Ferruzzi GJ, Di Maio M, et al. Moving toward precision medicine in acute coronary syndromes: a multimodal assessment of nonculprit lesions. J Clin Med. 2023 Jul 7;12(13):4550. doi: 10.3390/jcm12134550. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13. Silverio A, Zilio F, Ciliberti G, Paolisso P, Barbato E. Definizione, classificazione e diagnosi di infarto miocardico in assenza di coronaropatia ostruttiva: a che punto siamo? [Definition, classification and diagnosis of myocardial infarction with non-obstructive coronary artery disease: where do we stand?] G Ital Cardiol. 2023 Oct;24(10):29–36. doi: 10.1714/4101.40992. (Italian) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14. Wald DS, Morris JK, Wald NJ, Chase AJ, Edwards RJ, Hughes LO, et al. Randomized trial of preventive angioplasty in myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 2013;369:1115–23. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1305520. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15. Gershlick AH, Khan JN, Kelly DJ, Greenwood JP, Sasikaran T, Curzen N, et al. Randomized trial of complete versus lesion-only revascularization in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention for STEMI and multivessel disease: the CvLPRIT trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;65:963–72. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2014.12.038. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16. Engstrøm T, Kelbæk H, Helqvist S, Høfsten DE, Kløvgaard L, Holmvang L, et al. Complete revascularisation versus treatment of the culprit lesion only in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease (DANAMI-3–PRIMULTI): an open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2015;386:665–71. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(15)60648-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17. Smits PC, Abdel-Wahab M, Neumann FJ, Boxma-de Klerk BM, Lunde K, Schotborgh CE, et al. Fractional flow reserve-guided multivessel angioplasty in myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 2017 Mar 30;376(13):1234–44. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1701067. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18. Mehta SR, Wood DA, Storey RF, Mehran R, Bainey KR, Nguyen H, et al. Complete revascularization with multivessel PCI for myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 2019 Oct 10;381(15):1411–21. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1907775. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19. Stone GW, Maehara A, Lansky AJ, de Bruyne B, Cristea E, Mintz GS, et al. A prospective natural-history study of coronary atherosclerosis. N Engl J Med. 2011 Jan 20;364(3):226–35. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1002358. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20. Heusch G, Libby P, Gersh B, Yellon D, Böhm M, Lopaschuk G, et al. Cardiovascular remodelling in coronary artery disease and heart failure. Lancet. 2014 May 31;383(9932):1933–43. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60107-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21. Konijnenberg LSF, Damman P, Duncker DJ, Kloner RA, Nijveldt R, van Geuns RM, et al. Pathophysiology and diagnosis of coronary microvascular dysfunction in ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Cardiovasc Res. 2020 Mar 1;116(4):787–805. doi: 10.1093/cvr/cvz301. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22. Esposito L, Cancro FP, Silverio A, Di Maio M, Iannece P, Damato A, et al. COVID-19 and acute coronary syndromes: from pathophysiology to clinical perspectives. Oxid Med Cell Longev. 2021 Aug 30;2021 doi: 10.1155/2021/4936571. 4936571. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23. De Rosa R, Silverio A, Varricchio A, De Luca G, Di Maio M, Radano I, et al. Meta-analysis comparing outcomes after everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffolds versus everolimus-eluting metallic stents in patients with acute coronary syndromes. Am J Cardiol. 2018 Jul 1;122(1):61–8. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2018.03.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24. Libby P. Mechanisms of acute coronary syndromes and their implications for therapy. N Engl J Med. 2013 May 23;368(21):2004–13. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra1216063. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25. Bangalore S, Toklu B, Feit F. Outcomes with coronary artery bypass graft surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention for patients with diabetes mellitus: can newer generation drug-eluting stents bridge the gap? Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2014 Aug;7(4):518–25. doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.114.001346. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26. Silverio A, Cancro FP, Di Maio M, Bellino M, Esposito L, Centore M, et al. Lipoprotein(a) levels and risk of adverse events after myocardial infarction in patients with and without diabetes. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2022 Oct;54(3):382–92. doi: 10.1007/s11239-022-02701-w. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27. Scudiero F, Canonico ME, Sanna GD, Dossi F, Silverio A, Galasso G, et al. Dual antiplatelet therapy with 3rd generation P2Y12 inhibitors in STEMI patients: impact of body mass index on loading dose-response. Cardiovasc Drugs Ther. 2023 Aug;37(4):695–703. doi: 10.1007/s10557-022-07322-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28. Bellino M, Galasso G, Silverio A, Tedeschi M, Formisano C, Romei S, et al. Soluble PCSK9 inhibition: indications, clinical impact, new molecular insights and practical approach-where do we stand? J Clin Med. 2023 Apr 18;12(8):2922. doi: 10.3390/jcm12082922. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29. Silverio A, Di Maio M, Prota C, De Angelis E, Radano I, Citro R, et al. Safety and efficacy of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants in elderly patients with atrial fibrillation: systematic review and meta-analysis of 22 studies and 440 281 patients. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Pharmacother. 2021 Apr 9;7(FI1):f20–9. doi: 10.1093/ehjcvp/pvz073. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30. Diletti R, den Dekker WK, Bennett J, Schotborgh CE, van der Schaaf R, Sabaté M, et al. Immediate versus staged complete revascularisation in patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome and multivessel coronary disease (BIOVASC): a prospective, open-label, non-inferiority, randomised trial. Lancet. 2023 Apr 8;401(10383):1172–82. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(23)00351-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31. Stähli BE, Varbella F, Linke A, Schwarz B, Felix SB, Seiffert M, et al. Timing of complete revascularization with multivessel PCI for myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 2023 Oct 12;389(15):1368–79. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2307823. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32. De Bruyne B, Pijls NH, Kalesan B, Barbato E, Tonino PA, Piroth Z, et al. Fractional flow reserve-guided PCI versus medical therapy in stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med. 2012 Sep 13;367(11):991–1001. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1205361. . Epub 2012 Aug 27. Erratum in: N Engl J Med 2012 Nov;367(18):1768. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33. Parikh RV, Liu G, Plomondon ME, Sehested TSG, Hlatky MA, Waldo SW, et al. Utilization and outcomes of measuring fractional flow reserve in patients with stable ischemic heart disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020 Feb 4;75(4):409–19. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2019.10.060. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34. Neumann FJ, Sousa-Uva M, Ahlsson A, Alfonso F, Banning AP, Benedetto U, et al. ESC Scientific Document Group 2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization Eur Heart J 2019. Jan 7 40 2 87 165 Erratum in: Eur Heart J 2019 Oct 1;40(37):3096 30165437 [Google Scholar]
- 35. Teunissen PF, Timmer SA, Danad I, de Waard GA, van de Ven PM, Raijmakers PG, et al. Coronary vasomotor function in infarcted and remote myocardium after primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Heart. 2015 Oct;101(19):1577–83. doi: 10.1136/heartjnl-2015-307825. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36. Thim T, van der Hoeven NW, Musto C, Nijveldt R, Götberg M, Engstrøm T, et al. Evaluation and management of nonculprit lesions in STEMI. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2020 May 25;13(10):1145–54. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2020.02.030. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37. Thim T, Götberg M, Fröbert O, Nijveldt R, van Royen N, Baptista SB, et al. Nonculprit stenosis evaluation using instantaneous wave-free ratio in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2017 Dec 26;10(24):2528–35. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2017.07.021. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38. Puymirat E, Cayla G, Simon T, Steg PG, Montalescot G, Durand-Zaleski I, et al. Multivessel PCI guided by FFR or angiography for myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 2021 Jul 22;385(4):297–308. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2104650. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39. Esposito L, Di Maio M, Silverio A, Cancro FP, Bellino M, Attisano T, et al. Treatment and outcome of patients with coronary artery ectasia: current evidence and novel opportunities for an old dilemma. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022 Feb 4;8:805727. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2021.805727. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40. Lee JM, Kim HK, Park KH, Choo EH, Kim CJ, Lee SH, et al. Fractional flow reserve versus angiography-guided strategy in acute myocardial infarction with multivessel disease: a randomized trial. Eur Heart J. 2023 Feb 7;44(6):473–84. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehac763. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41. Virmani R, Burke AP, Farb A, Kolodgie FD. Pathology of the vulnerable plaque. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006 Apr 18;47(8 Suppl):C13–8. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2005.10.065. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42. Xie Y, Mintz GS, Yang J, Doi H, Iñiguez A, Dangas GD, et al. Clinical outcome of nonculprit plaque ruptures in patients with acute coronary syndrome in the PROSPECT study. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014 Apr;7(4):397–405. doi: 10.1016/j.jcmg.2013.10.010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43. Erlinge D, Maehara A, Ben-Yehuda O, Bøtker HE, Maeng M, Kjøller-Hansen L, et al. Identification of vulnerable plaques and patients by intracoronary near-infrared spectroscopy and ultrasound (PROSPECT II): a prospective natural history study. Lancet. 2021 Mar 13;397(10278):985–95. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00249-X. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44. Oemrawsingh RM, Cheng JM, García-García HM, van Geuns RJ, de Boer SP, Simsek C, et al. Near-infrared spectroscopy predicts cardiovascular outcome in patients with coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014 Dec 16;64(23):2510–8. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2014.07.998. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45. Ali ZA, Karimi Galougahi K, Mintz GS, Maehara A, Shlofmitz RA, Mattesini A. Intracoronary optical coherence tomography: state of the art and future directions. Euro-Intervention. 2021 Jun 11;17(2):e105–23. doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-21-00089. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46. Prati F, Romagnoli E, Gatto L, La Manna A, Burzotta F, Ozaki Y, et al. Relationship between coronary plaque morphology of the left anterior descending artery and 12 months clinical outcome: the CLIMA study. Eur Heart J. 2020 Jan 14;41(3):383–91. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehz520. Erratum in: Eur Heart J 2020 Jan 14;41(3):393. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47. Kedhi E, Berta B, Roleder T, Hermanides RS, Fabris E, IJsselmuiden AJJ, et al. Thin-cap fibroatheroma predicts clinical events in diabetic patients with normal fractional flow reserve: the COMBINE OCT-FFR trial. Eur Heart J. 2021 Dec 1;42(45):4671–9. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehab433. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48. Kolossváry M, Szilveszter B, Merkely B, Maurovich-Horvat P. Plaque imaging with CT-a comprehensive review on coronary CT angiography based risk assessment. Cardiovasc Diagn Ther. 2017 Oct;7(5):489–506. doi: 10.21037/cdt.2016.11.06. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49. Conte E, Annoni A, Pontone G, Mushtaq S, Guglielmo M, Baggiano A, et al. Evaluation of coronary plaque characteristics with coronary computed tomography angiography in patients with non-obstructive coronary artery disease: a long-term follow-up study. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2017 Oct 1;18(10):1170–8. doi: 10.1093/ehjci/jew200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50. Otsuka K, Fukuda S, Tanaka A, Nakanishi K, Taguchi H, Yoshikawa J, et al. Napkin-ring sign on coronary CT angiography for the prediction of acute coronary syndrome. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013 Apr;6(4):448–57. doi: 10.1016/j.jcmg.2012.09.016. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51. Kröner ES, van Velzen JE, Boogers MJ, Siebelink HM, Schalij MJ, Kroft LJ, et al. Positive remodeling on coronary computed tomography as a marker for plaque vulnerability on virtual histology intravascular ultrasound. Am J Cardiol. 2011 Jun 15;107(12):1725–9. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2011.02.337. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 52. Ferencik M, Mayrhofer T, Bittner DO, Emami H, Puchner SB, Lu MT, et al. Use of high-risk coronary atherosclerotic plaque detection for risk stratification of patients with stable chest pain: a secondary analysis of the PROMISE randomized clinical trial. JAMA Cardiol. 2018 Feb 1;3(2):144–52. doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2017.4973. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 53. Fairbairn TA, Nieman K, Akasaka T, Nørgaard BL, Berman DS, Raff G, et al. Real-world clinical utility and impact on clinical decision-making of coronary computed tomography angiography-derived fractional flow reserve: lessons from the ADVANCE registry. Eur Heart J. 2018 Nov 1;39(41):3701–11. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehy530. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 54. Leipsic J, Yang TH, Thompson A, Koo BK, Mancini GB, Taylor Ce, et al. CT angiography (CTA) and diagnostic performance of noninvasive fractional flow reserve: results from the Determination of Fractional Flow Reserve by Anatomic CTA (DeFACTO) study. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014 May;202(5):989–94. doi: 10.2214/AJR.13.11441. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 55. Lee JM, Choi G, Koo BK, Hwang D, Park J, Zhang J, et al. Identification of high-risk plaques destined to cause acute coronary syndrome using coronary computed tomographic angiography and computational fluid dynamics. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2019 Jun;12(6):1032–43. doi: 10.1016/j.jcmg.2018.01.023. Erratum in: JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2019 Nov 12:11 Pt 1:2288–2289. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 56. Gaur S, Taylor CA, Jensen JM, Bøtker HE, Christiansen EH, Kaltoft AK, et al. FFR derived from coronary CT angiography in nonculprit lesions of patients with recent STEMI. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2017 Apr;10(4):424–33. doi: 10.1016/j.jcmg.2016.05.019. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 57. Ismail TF, Strugnell W, Coletti C, Boẑić-Iven M, Weingärtner S, Hammernik K, et al. Cardiac MR: from theory to practice. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022 Mar 3;9:826283. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.826283. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 58. Patel AR, Salerno M, Kwong RY, Singh A, Heydari B, Kramer CM. Stress cardiac magnetic resonance myocardial perfusion imaging: JACC review topic of the week. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2021 Oct 19;78(16):1655–68. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2021.08.022. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 59. Everaars H, van der Hoeven NW, Janssens GN, van Leeuwen MA, van Loon RB, Schumacher SP, et al. Cardiac magnetic resonance for evaluating nonculprit lesions after myocardial infarction: comparison with fractional flow reserve. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2020 Mar;13(3):715–28. doi: 10.1016/j.jcmg.2019.07.019. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]