Culprit vessel versus immediate complete revascularization in patients with ST-segment myocardial infarction-a systematic review.

[1]  L. Køber,et al.  Complete revascularisation versus treatment of the culprit lesion only in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease (DANAMI-3—PRIMULTI): an open-label, randomised controlled trial , 2015, The Lancet.

[2]  H. Swanton,et al.  Randomized Trial of Complete Versus Lesion-Only Revascularization in Patients Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for STEMI and Multivessel Disease , 2015, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[3]  G. Guyatt,et al.  Culprit Vessel Only vs Immediate Complete Revascularization in Patients With Acute ST‐Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis , 2014, Clinical cardiology.

[4]  S. Mehta,et al.  Complete vs culprit-only revascularization for patients with multivessel disease undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. , 2014, American heart journal.

[5]  C. Berry,et al.  Randomized trial of preventive angioplasty in myocardial infarction. , 2013, The New England journal of medicine.

[6]  Jane A. Linderbaum,et al.  2013 ACCF/AHA guideline for the management of ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. , 2013, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[7]  Harlan M Krumholz,et al.  2013 ACCF/AHA guideline for the management of ST-elevation myocardial infarction: executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. , 2013, Circulation.

[8]  Deepak L. Bhatt,et al.  2013 ACCF/AHA guideline for the management of ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. , 2013, Circulation.

[9]  D. Atar,et al.  ESC Guidelines for the Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction in Patients Presenting With ST-Segment Elevation , 2013 .

[10]  G. Stone,et al.  Prognostic factors in primary and elective percutaneous coronary intervention , 2011 .

[11]  Gerald Gartlehner,et al.  [GRADE guidelines: 8. Rating the quality of evidence - indirectness]. , 2012, Zeitschrift fur Evidenz, Fortbildung und Qualitat im Gesundheitswesen.

[12]  Gerald Gartlehner,et al.  [GRADE guidelines: 7. Rating the quality of evidence - inconsistency]. , 2012, Zeitschrift fur Evidenz, Fortbildung und Qualitat im Gesundheitswesen.

[13]  Gerald Gartlehner,et al.  [GRADE guidelines: 5. Rating the quality of evidence: publication bias]. , 2012, Zeitschrift fur Evidenz, Fortbildung und Qualitat im Gesundheitswesen.

[14]  G. Guyatt,et al.  GRADE guidelines 6. Rating the quality of evidence--imprecision. , 2011, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[15]  G. Guyatt,et al.  GRADE guidelines: 4. Rating the quality of evidence--study limitations (risk of bias). , 2011, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[16]  G. Sangiorgi,et al.  A randomised trial of target-vessel versus multi-vessel revascularisation in ST-elevation myocardial infarction: major adverse cardiac events during long-term follow-up , 2009, Heart.

[17]  G. Guyatt,et al.  GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations , 2008, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[18]  B. Gersh,et al.  Impact of multivessel disease on reperfusion success and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction. , 2007, European heart journal.

[19]  M. Bonardi,et al.  Single vs multivessel treatment during primary angioplasty: results of the multicentre randomised HEpacoat™ for cuLPrit or multivessel stenting for Acute Myocardial Infarction (HELP AMI) Study , 2004, International journal of cardiovascular interventions.

[20]  J. Boura,et al.  Primary angioplasty versus intravenous thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction : a quantitative review of 23 randomised trials , 2022 .

[21]  J. Ottervanger,et al.  Long-term benefit of primary angioplasty as compared with thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction. , 1999, The New England journal of medicine.

[22]  S. Egaas.  A clinical trial comparing primary coronary angioplasty with tissue plasminogen activator for acute myocardial infarction , 1997 .

[23]  S. Smith,et al.  Outcome of urgent percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty in acute myocardial infarction: comparison of single-vessel versus multivessel coronary artery disease. , 1992, American heart journal.