A Meta-Analysis of Timing of Complete Revascularization in Patients with ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction

<b>Background</b><i>:</i> Recent randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of STEMI patients with multi-vessel disease (MVD) reported potential superiority of immediate (ICR) vs. staged complete revascularization (SCR). Inherently, the risk of procedural MI is less likely to be detected in ICR patients, and this may have influenced the results. Recently published meta-analyses encompassed observational studies without including STEMI data from the BioVasc trial. The aim of this meta-analysis was to perform an updated comparison of the two strategies in STEMI patients with MVD. <b>Methods</b><i>:</i> Electronic databases were searched from their inception till August 2024 to identify RCTs assessing CR timing in STEMI patients with MVD. Only studies with an endpoint involving major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) were included. <b>Results</b><i>:</i> Six RCTs totaling 2023 patients were included in the analysis. The median time to staged PCI was 19 days. The incidence of MACE (as defined by each study's protocol) was comparable between the two strategies [RR 0.86, 95% CI (0.58 to 1.27)]. There was also no difference in the risk of non-procedural MI [RR 0.91, 95% CI (0.49-1.67)], death [RR 1.47, 95% CI (0.89-2.44)] and cardiovascular death [RR 1.53, 95% CI (0.79-2.98)]. There was a significant 40% reduction in unplanned revascularization in patients undergoing ICR versus SCR [RR 0.60 (0.40 to 0.89), <i>p</i> = 0.01]. <b>Conclusions</b><i>:</i> ICR reduced the risk of unplanned revascularization compared to SCR but had a comparable effect on MACE, death, cardiovascular death and non-procedural MI. Both strategies are safe in managing patients with acute MI and MVD.