ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2026
Strategies and Timing of Complete Revascularization in STEMI Patients with Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Multivessel coronary artery disease is observed in a substantial proportion of patients presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and identifies a higher-risk phenotype characterized by larger atherosclerotic burden, recurrent ischemic events, and greater need for subsequent revascularization. Over the past decade, randomized evidence has progressively shifted the interventional paradigm from culprit-lesion-only primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) toward complete revascularization in hemodynamically stable STEMI patients with suitable non-culprit lesions. Nevertheless, several clinically relevant questions remain unresolved, including the optimal criteria for selecting non-culprit lesions, the relative value of angiography, coronary physiology, and intracoronary imaging, the timing of complete revascularization, and the management of patients presenting with cardiogenic shock. Angiography-guided complete revascularization has the strongest evidence base, while physiology-guided approaches may reduce unnecessary PCI but have not demonstrated superiority over angiography-guided strategies in direct randomized comparisons. Intracoronary imaging offers unique information on plaque vulnerability and PCI optimization, although dedicated outcome trials in STEMI remain limited. The timing of complete revascularization has also evolved, with contemporary trials supporting early treatment in selected stable patients but not establishing a universal immediate strategy. This review summarizes current evidence, unresolved controversies, and emerging directions regarding strategies and timing of complete revascularization in STEMI patients with multivessel disease.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.