IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0234655.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Immediate versus deferred percutaneous coronary intervention for patients with acute coronary syndrome: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Author

Listed:
  • Weijun Li
  • Wenhua He
  • Yuqing Zhou
  • Yanfei Guo

Abstract

Inconsistent results exist regarding the treatment effectiveness of immediate versus deferred percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of immediate versus deferred PCI in ACS patients. PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library electronic databases were systematically searched from their inception up to August 2019. Random-effects models were employed to calculate pooled relative risks (RRs) and weight mean differences (WMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A total of 10 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that recruited 3350 patients were selected for inclusion in the final meta-analysis. Four trials included patients with non-ST elevation ACS (NSTEACS), whereas the remaining six trials included patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). There were no significant differences between immediate versus deferred PCI for the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (NSTEACS patients: RR, 0.76, 95%CI, 0.33–1.75, P = 0.513; STEMI patients: RR, 1.24, 95%CI, 0.80–1.92, P = 0.335), myocardial infarction (NSTEACS patients: RR, 0.88, 95%CI, 0.27–2.81, P = 0.826; STEMI patients: RR, 0.86, 95%CI, 0.43–1.74, P = 0.678), all-cause mortality (NSTEACS patients: RR, 0.85, 95%CI, 0.38–1.88, P = 0.686; STEMI patients: RR, 1.16, 95%CI, 0.82–1.66, P = 0.407), target vessel revascularisation (NSTEACS patients: RR, 1.26, 95%CI, 0.29–5.43, P = 0.756; STEMI patients: RR, 1.01, 95%CI, 0.51–1.97, P = 0.988), or major bleeding (NSTEACS patients: RR, 0.99, 95%CI, 0.64–1.54, P = 0.972; STEMI patients: RR, 0.90, 95%CI, 0.45–1.77, P = 0.753). Although patients who underwent immediate PCI may experience increased incidences of cardiac death (RR, 1.19, 95%CI, 0.69–2.07, P = 0.525) and no or slow reflow (RR, 1.60, 95%CI, 0.91–2.84, P = 0.105), these increases were not statistically significant. We noted that immediate versus deferred PCI was associated with a reduced incidence of myocardial brush grade 3 (RR, 0.70, 95%CI, 0.56–0.88, P = 0.002); however, no significant differences were observed between immediate and deferred PCI for TIMI III flow (RR, 0.98, 95%CI, 0.93–1.03, P = 0.453), complete ST-segment resolution (RR, 0.93, 95%CI, 0.75–1.17, P = 0.548), and ejection fraction (WMD, −1.05, 95%CI, -2.58 to 0.49, P = 0.182). The findings of this study suggested that deferred PCI did not yield significant benefits for clinical endpoints. Further large-scale RCTs should be conducted to verify the findings of this study.

Suggested Citation

  • Weijun Li & Wenhua He & Yuqing Zhou & Yanfei Guo, 2020. "Immediate versus deferred percutaneous coronary intervention for patients with acute coronary syndrome: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-15, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0234655
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0234655
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0234655
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0234655&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0234655?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Feng Liu & Qinglong Guo & Guoqiang Xie & Han Zhang & Yaxi Wu & Lixia Yang, 2015. "Percutaneous Coronary Intervention after Fibrinolysis for ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Patients: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(11), pages 1-16, November.
    2. A. E. Ades & G. Lu & J. P. T. Higgins, 2005. "The Interpretation of Random-Effects Meta-Analysis in Decision Models," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 25(6), pages 646-654, November.
    3. David Moher & Alessandro Liberati & Jennifer Tetzlaff & Douglas G Altman & The PRISMA Group, 2009. "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(7), pages 1-6, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Xiaowei Gong & Boyun Yuan & Yadong Yuan, 2022. "Incidence and prognostic value of pulmonary embolism in COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(3), pages 1-16, March.
    2. Fanjie Meng & Xiangpo Pan & Wenzhen Tong, 2018. "Rifampicin versus streptomycin for brucellosis treatment in humans: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(2), pages 1-12, February.
    3. Biao Zhou & Gao Feng Feng Cai & Hua Kun Kun Lv & Shuang Fei Fei Xu & Zheng Ting Ting Wang & Zheng Gang Gang Jiang & Chong Gao Gao Hu & Yong Di Di Chen, 2019. "Factors Correlating to the Development of Hepatitis C Virus Infection among Drug Users—Findings from a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(13), pages 1-17, July.
    4. Se Young Kim & Mi-Kyoung Cho, 2022. "The Effect of Nurse Support Programs on Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behaviors among Hospital Nurses: A Meta-Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(24), pages 1-23, December.
    5. Arkaitz Castañeda-Babarro & Diego Marqués-Jiménez & Julio Calleja-González & Aitor Viribay & Patxi León-Guereño & Juan Mielgo-Ayuso, 2020. "Effect of Listening to Music on Wingate Anaerobic Test Performance. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-20, June.
    6. Bin Su & Tiansheng Liu & Haojun Fan & Feng Chen & Hui Ding & Zhouwei Wu & Hongwu Wang & Shike Hou, 2016. "Inflammatory Markers and the Risk of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(4), pages 1-13, April.
    7. Mohammad Hossein YektaKooshali & Farahnaz Movahedzadeh & Ali Alavi Foumani & Hoda Sabati & Alireza Jafari, 2019. "Is latent tuberculosis infection challenging in Iranian health care workers? A systematic review and meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(10), pages 1-19, October.
    8. Xian Liu & Huan Zhang & Haijing Zhang & Mengzhuo Guo & Yuanchao Gao & Chunyan Du, 2020. "Intermittent epidural bolus versus continuous epidural infusions for labor analgesia: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(6), pages 1-17, June.
    9. İlkay Unay-Gailhard & Mark A. Brennen, 2022. "How digital communications contribute to shaping the career paths of youth: a review study focused on farming as a career option," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(4), pages 1491-1508, December.
    10. Mahin Ghafari & Vali Baigi & Zahra Cheraghi & Amin Doosti-Irani, 2016. "The Prevalence of Asymptomatic Bacteriuria in Iranian Pregnant Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(6), pages 1-10, June.
    11. Elizabeth T Cafiero-Fonseca & Andrew Stawasz & Sydney T Johnson & Reiko Sato & David E Bloom, 2017. "The full benefits of adult pneumococcal vaccination: A systematic review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(10), pages 1-23, October.
    12. Santos Urbina & Sofía Villatoro & Jesús Salinas, 2021. "Self-Regulated Learning and Technology-Enhanced Learning Environments in Higher Education: A Scoping Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-12, June.
    13. Oded Berger-Tal & Alison L Greggor & Biljana Macura & Carrie Ann Adams & Arden Blumenthal & Amos Bouskila & Ulrika Candolin & Carolina Doran & Esteban Fernández-Juricic & Kiyoko M Gotanda & Catherine , 2019. "Systematic reviews and maps as tools for applying behavioral ecology to management and policy," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 30(1), pages 1-8.
    14. Nadine Desrochers & Adèle Paul‐Hus & Jen Pecoskie, 2017. "Five decades of gratitude: A meta‐synthesis of acknowledgments research," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 68(12), pages 2821-2833, December.
    15. Maryono, Maryono & Killoes, Aditya Marendra & Adhikari, Rajendra & Abdul Aziz, Ammar, 2024. "Agriculture development through multi-stakeholder partnerships in developing countries: A systematic literature review," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    16. Alene Sze Jing Yong & Yi Heng Lim & Mark Wing Loong Cheong & Ednin Hamzah & Siew Li Teoh, 2022. "Willingness-to-pay for cancer treatment and outcome: a systematic review," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(6), pages 1037-1057, August.
    17. Xue-Ying Xu & Hong Kong & Rui-Xiang Song & Yu-Han Zhai & Xiao-Fei Wu & Wen-Si Ai & Hong-Bo Liu, 2014. "The Effectiveness of Noninvasive Biomarkers to Predict Hepatitis B-Related Significant Fibrosis and Cirrhosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(6), pages 1-16, June.
    18. Vicente Miñana-Signes & Manuel Monfort-Pañego & Javier Valiente, 2021. "Teaching Back Health in the School Setting: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(3), pages 1-18, January.
    19. Agnieszka A. Tubis & Katarzyna Grzybowska, 2022. "In Search of Industry 4.0 and Logistics 4.0 in Small-Medium Enterprises—A State of the Art Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(22), pages 1-26, November.
    20. Obsa Urgessa Ayana & Jima Degaga, 2022. "Effects of rural electrification on household welfare: a meta-regression analysis," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 69(2), pages 209-261, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0234655. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.