Dambrink and Ghani 2010.

Methods	RCT. Randomisation ratio: 2:1. Number of study centres: 1 centre in the Netherlands.
Participants	Inclusion criteria: MVD with successful P‐PCI for STEMI. Exclusion criteria: urgent indication for additional revascularisation, aged > 80 years, chronic occlusion of 1 of the non‐culprit artery(ies), prior CABG, left main stenosis of ≥ 50%, restenotic lesions in non‐culprit artery(ies), chronic atrial fibrillation, limited life‐expectancy, or other factors that made complete follow‐up unlikely. Diagnostic criteria MVD: ≥ 1 significant stenosis in at least 2 major epicardial coronary arteries or the combination of a side branch and a main epicardial vessel provided that they supplied different territories. Significant stenosis: diameter ≥ 50% in luminal diameter in at least 1 view. FFR < 0.75 defined ischaemic stenosis and those were intervened only, and > 90% stenosis were intervened without FFR measurement. Sample size: complete revascularisation n = 80 and culprit‐only revascularisation n = 41.
Interventions	Complete revascularisation: staged intervention on significant stenotic non‐culprit lesions compatible with ischaemia (FFR < 0.75) with plain angioplasty, BMS, or DES. Culprit‐only revascularisation: medical management after P‐PCI of culprit artery only unless ischaemic symptoms were elicited with exercise testing, dobutamine stress echocardiography, or myocardial scintigraphy, in those cases ischaemia‐guided revascularisation was performed.
Outcomes	Primary: EF at 6 months. Secondary: change in EF, wall motion score, left ventricle end‐systolic and end‐diastolic volume, and MACE.
Notes	Early termination because of slow enrolment.
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Randomisation was performed with a computer program.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Not mentioned how allocation concealment was insured.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Not mentioned in the article.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Only mentioned in the study that echocardiographic and radionucleotide data were blinded to treatment allocation.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	In the complete revascularisation group 1.3% dropped out, vs 2.4% in the culprit‐only group.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	High risk	Study did not have a published protocol and was not registered on any clinical trial databases.
Other bias	High risk	Study had early termination because of slow enrolment. Unclear source of funding.