Revascularization Strategies in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction and Cardiogenic Shock: Results from the Portuguese Registry on Acute Coronary Syndromes.

BACKGROUND In patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI), cardiogenic shock (CS), and multivessel disease (MVD) questions remain unanswered when it comes to intervention on non-culprit arteries. OBJECTIVE This article aims to 1) characterize patients with MI, CS and MVD included in the Portuguese Registry on Acute Coronary Syndromes (ProACS); 2) compare different revascularization strategies in the sample; 3) identify predictors of in-hospital mortality among these patients. METHODS Observational retrospective study of patients with MI, CS and MVD included in the ProACS between 2010 and 2018. Two revascularization strategies were compared: complete during the index procedure (group 1); and complete or incomplete during the index hospitalization (groups 2-3). The primary endpoint was a composite of in-hospital death or MI. Statistical significance was defined by a p-value <0.05. RESULTS We identified 127 patients with MI, CS, and MVD (18.1% in group 1, and 81.9% in groups 2-3), with a mean age of 7012 years, and 92.9% of the sample being diagnosed with ST-segment elevation MI (STEMI). The primary endpoint occurred in 47.8% of the patients in group 1 and 37.5% in group 2-3 (p = 0.359). The rates of in-hospital death, recurrent MI, stroke, and major bleeding were also similar. The predictors of in-hospital death in this sample were the presence of left ventricle systolic dysfunction on admission (OR 16.8), right bundle branch block (OR 7.6), and anemia (OR 5.2) (p ≤ 0.02 for both). CONCLUSIONS Among patients with MI, CS, and MVD included in the ProACS, there was no significant difference between complete and incomplete revascularization during the index hospitalization regarding the occurrence of in-hospital death or MI. (Arq Bras Cardiol. 2021; 116(5):867-876).