Management of Culprit and Non-Culprit Lesions in Acute Coronary Syndrome

1. Neglia D, Rovai D, Caselli C, et al. Detection of Significant Coronary Artery Disease by Noninvasive Anatomical and Functional Imaging. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015;8: e002179. Search in Google Scholar

2. Dönmez E, Koç M, Şeker T, İçen YK, Çayli M. The assessment of non culprit coronary artery lesions in patients with ST segment elevated myocardial infarction and multivessel disease by control angiography with quantitative coronary angiography. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2016;32:1471-1476.10.1007/s10554-016-0943-8 Search in Google Scholar

3. Montone RA, Meucci MC, Niccoli G. The management of non-culprit coronary lesions in patients with acute coronary syndrome. Eur Heart J Suppl. 2020;22:L170-L175.10.1093/eurheartj/suaa175 Search in Google Scholar

4. Lønborg J, Engstrøm T, Kelbæk H, et al. Fractional Flow Reserve–Guided Complete Revascularization Improves the Prognosis in Patients With ST-Segment–Elevation Myocardial Infarction and Severe Nonculprit Disease: A DANAMI 3-PRIMULTI Substudy (Primary PCI in Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction and Multivessel Disease: Treatment of Culprit Lesion Only or Complete Revascularization). Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2017;10: e004460.10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.116.004460 Search in Google Scholar

5. Kundu A, Sardar P, Kakouros N, et al. Outcomes of multivessel vs culprit lesion-only percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: Evidence from an updated meta-analysis. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2019;94:70-81.10.1002/ccd.28062 Search in Google Scholar

6. Smits PC, Abdel-Wahab M, Neumann F-J, et al. Fractional Flow Reserve– Guided Multivessel Angioplasty in Myocardial Infarction. N Engl J Med. 2017;376:1234-1244.10.1056/NEJMoa1701067 Search in Google Scholar

7. Park J, Lee JM, Koo B-K, et al. Relevance of anatomical, plaque, and hemodynamic characteristics of non-obstructive coronary lesions in the prediction of risk for acute coronary syndrome. Eur Radiol. 2019;29:6119-6128.10.1007/s00330-019-06221-9 Search in Google Scholar

8. Mathew RC, Gottbrecht M, Salerno M. Computed Tomography Fractional Flow Reserve to Guide Coronary Angiography and Intervention. Interv Cardiol Clin. 2018;7:345-354.10.1016/j.iccl.2018.03.008 Search in Google Scholar

9. Götberg M, Christiansen EH, Gudmundsdottir IJ, et al. Instantaneous Wave-free Ratio versus Fractional Flow Reserve to Guide PCI. N Engl J Med. 2017;376:1813-1823.10.1056/NEJMoa1616540 Search in Google Scholar

10. Lee JM, Choi G, Koo B-K, 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;12:1032-1043.10.1016/j.jcmg.2018.01.023 Search in Google Scholar

11. Mintz GS, Guagliumi G. Intravascular imaging in coronary artery disease. Lancet. 2017;390:793-809.10.1016/S0140-6736(17)31957-8 Search in Google Scholar

12. von Knebel Doeberitz PL, De Cecco CN, Schoepf UJ, et al. Impact of Coronary Computerized Tomography Angiography-Derived Plaque Quantification and Machine-Learning Computerized Tomography Fractional Flow Reserve on Adverse Cardiac Outcome. Am J Cardiol. 2019;124:1340-1348.10.1016/j.amjcard.2019.07.06131481177 Search in Google Scholar

13. Lee JM, Choi G, Koo B-K, 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;12:1032-1043.10.1016/j.jcmg.2018.01.02329550316 Search in Google Scholar

14. Puchner SB, Mayrhofer T, Park J, et al. Differences in the association of total versus local coronary artery calcium with acute coronary syndrome and culprit lesions in patients with acute chest pain: The coronary calcium paradox. Atherosclerosis. 2018;274:251-257.10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2018.04.017599957929703635 Search in Google Scholar

15. Russo M, Kim HO, Kurihara O, et al. Characteristics of non-culprit plaques in acute coronary syndrome patients with layered culprit plaque. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2020;21:1421-1430.10.1093/ehjci/jez30831848590 Search in Google Scholar

16. Kalra DK, Heo R, Valenti V, Nakazato R, Min JK. Role of Computed Tomography for Diagnosis and Risk Stratification of Patients With Suspected or Known Coronary Artery Disease. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2014;34:1144-1154.10.1161/ATVBAHA.113.302074412011824723554 Search in Google Scholar

17. Mester A, Chiţu M, Rat N, et al. CT Determination of Fractional Flow Reserve in Coronary Lesions. Journal of Interdisciplinary Medicine. 2016;1:237-241.10.1515/jim-2016-0070 Search in Google Scholar

18. Duguay TM, Tesche C, Vliegenthart R, et al. Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography-Derived Fractional Flow Reserve Based on Machine Learning for Risk Stratification of Non-Culprit Coronary Narrowings in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome. Am J Cardiol. 2017;120:1260-1266.10.1016/j.amjcard.2017.07.00828844517 Search in Google Scholar

19. Kyhl K, Ahtarovski KA, Nepper-Christensen L, et al. Complete Revascularization Versus Culprit Lesion Only in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction and Multivessel Disease. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019;12:721-730.10.1016/j.jcin.2019.01.24831000010 Search in Google Scholar

20. Thiele H, Akin I, Sandri M, et al. One-Year Outcomes after PCI Strategies in Cardiogenic Shock. N Engl J Med. 2018;379:1699-1710.10.1056/NEJMoa180878830145971 Search in Google Scholar

21. Kolte D, Sardar P, Khera S, et al. Culprit Vessel–Only Versus Multivessel Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock Complicating ST-Segment–Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Collaborative Meta-Analysis. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2017;10: e005582.10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.117.00558229146672 Search in Google Scholar

22. Thiele H, Akin I, Sandri M, et al. One-Year Outcomes after PCI Strategies in Cardiogenic Shock. N Engl J Med. 2018;379:1699-1710.10.1056/NEJMoa180878830145971 Search in Google Scholar

23. Gershlick AH, Banning AS, Parker E, et al. Long-Term Follow-Up of Complete Versus Lesion-Only Revascularization in STEMI and Multivessel Disease. Am J Cardiol. 2019;74:3083-3094.10.1016/j.jacc.2019.10.03331856964 Search in Google Scholar

24. Jeger R, Jaguszewski M, Nallamothu BN, et al. Acute multivessel revascularization improves 1-year outcome in ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Int J Cardiol. 2014;172:76-81.10.1016/j.ijcard.2013.12.08324461983 Search in Google Scholar

25. Dziewierz A, Siudak Z, Rakowski T, Zasada W, Dubiel JS, Dudek D. Impact of Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease and Noninfarct-Related Artery Revascularization on Outcome of Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Transferred for Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (from the EUROTRANSFER Registry). Am J Cardiol. 2010;106:342-347.10.1016/j.amjcard.2010.03.02920643243 Search in Google Scholar

26. de Waha S, Jobs A, Eitel I, et al. Multivessel versus culprit lesion only percutaneous coronary intervention in cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care. 2018;7:28-37.10.1177/204887261771964028703046 Search in Google Scholar

27. Wald DS, Morris JK, Wald NJ, et al. Randomized Trial of Preventive Angioplasty in Myocardial Infarction. N Engl J Med. 2013;369:1115-1123.10.1056/NEJMoa130552023991625 Search in Google Scholar

28. Elfaramawy A, Hassan M, Nagy M, ElGuindy A, Elmahdy MF. Impact of fractional flow reserve on decision-making in daily clinical practice: A single center experience in Egypt. Egypt Heart J. 2018;70:161-165.10.1016/j.ehj.2017.12.007612334130190641 Search in Google Scholar

29. Baumann AAW, Mishra A, Worthley MI, Nelson AJ, Psaltis PJ. Management of multivessel coronary artery disease in patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a complex path to precision medicine. Ther Adv Chronic Dis. 2020;11:204062232093852.10.1177/2040622320938527733177032655848 Search in Google Scholar

30. Piróth Z, Boxma-de Klerk BM, Omerovic E, et al. The Natural History of Nonculprit Lesions in STEMI. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2020;13:954-961.10.1016/j.jcin.2020.02.01532327091 Search in Google Scholar

31. Götberg M, Christiansen EH, Gudmundsdottir IJ, et al. Instantaneous Wave-free Ratio versus Fractional Flow Reserve to Guide PCI. N Engl J Med. 2017;376(19):1813-1823.10.1056/NEJMoa161654028317438 Search in Google Scholar

32. Hlatky MA, De Bruyne B, Pontone G, et al. Quality-of-Life and Economic Outcomes of Assessing Fractional Flow Reserve With Computed Tomography Angiography: PLATFORM. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;66:2315-2323.10.1016/j.jacc.2015.09.05126475205 Search in Google Scholar

33. Lee SH, Choi KH, Lee JM, et al. Physiologic Characteristics and Clinical Outcomes of Patients With Discordance Between FFR and iFR. JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions. 2019;12(20):2018-2031.10.1016/j.jcin.2019.06.04431563683 Search in Google Scholar

34. Lee JM, Doh J-H, Nam C-W, Shin E-S, Koo B-K. Functional Approach for Coronary Artery Disease: Filling the Gap Between Evidence and Practice. Korean Circ J. 2018;48(3):179.10.4070/kcj.2017.0393586131029557104 Search in Google Scholar

35. Dey D, Gaur S, Ovrehus KA, et al. Integrated prediction of lesion-specific ischaemia from quantitative coronary CT angiography using machine learning: a multicentre study. Eur Radiol. 2018;28(6):2655-2664.10.1007/s00330-017-5223-z594053729352380 Search in Google Scholar