p.77 抽出テキスト

CLINICAL STATEMENTS AND GUIDELINES

Circulation. 2025;151:e771–e862. DOI: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000001309 April 1, 2025 e847

lege of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2022;145:e18–e114. 6.	 Henriques JP, Zijlstra F, Ottervanger JP, et al. Incidence and clinical significance of distal embolization during primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J. 2002;23:1112–1117. 7.	 Stone GW, Peterson MA, Lansky AJ, et al. Impact of normalized myocardial perfusion after successful angioplasty in acute myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002;39:591–597. 8.	 Dudek D, Mielecki W, Burzotta F, et al. Thrombus aspiration followed by direct stenting: a novel strategy of primary percutaneous coronary intervention in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Results of the Polish- Italian-Hungarian RAndomized ThrombEctomy Trial (PIHRATE Trial). Am Heart J. 2010;160:966–972. 9.	 Sardella G, Mancone M, Bucciarelli-Ducci C, et al. Thrombus aspiration during primary percutaneous coronary intervention improves myocardial reperfusion and reduces infarct size: the EXPIRA (thrombectomy with export catheter in infarct-related artery during primary percutaneous coronary intervention) prospective, randomized trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;53:309– 315. 10.	 Svilaas T, Vlaar PJ, van der Horst IC, et al. Thrombus aspiration during primary percutaneous coronary intervention. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:557–567. 11.	 Vlaar PJ, Svilaas T, van der Horst IC, et al. Cardiac death and reinfarction after 1 year in the Thrombus Aspiration during Percutaneous coronary intervention in Acute myocardial infarction Study (TAPAS): a 1-year follow-up study. Lancet. 2008;371:1915–1920. 12.	 Jolly SS, Cairns JA, Yusuf S, et al. Outcomes after thrombus aspiration for ST elevation myocardial infarction: 1-year follow-up of the prospective randomised TOTAL trial. Lancet (London, England). 2016;387:127–135. 13.	 Lagerqvist B, Frobert O, Olivecrona GK, et al. Outcomes 1 year after throm-

bus aspiration for myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 2014;371:1111– 1120. 7.3. Use of Intracoronary Imaging 1.	 Lee JM, Choi KH, Song YB, et al. Intravascular imaging-guided or angiography-guided complex PCI. N Engl J Med. 2023;388:1668–1679. 2.	 Ali ZA, Landmesser U, Maehara A, et al. Optical coherence tomographyguided versus angiography-guided PCI. N Engl J Med. 2023;389:1466– 1476. 3.	 Hong SJ, Mintz GS, Ahn CM, et al. Effect of intravascular ultrasound-guided drug-eluting stent implantation: 5-year follow-up of the IVUS-XPL randomized trial. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2020;13:62–71. 4.	 Holm NR, Andreasen LN, Neghabat O, et al. OCT or angiography guidance for PCI in complex bifurcation lesions. N Engl J Med. 2023;389:1477–1487. 5.	 Gao XF, Ge Z, Kong XQ, et al. 3-year outcomes of the ULTIMATE trial comparing intravascular ultrasound versus angiography-guided drug-eluting stent implantation. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2021;14:247–257. 6.	 Kang DY, Ahn JM, Yun SC, et al. Guiding intervention for complex coronary lesions by optical coherence tomography or intravascular ultrasound. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2024;83:401–413. 7.	 Ali ZA, Maehara A, Genereux P, et al. Optical coherence tomography compared with intravascular ultrasound and with angiography to guide coronary stent implantation (ILUMIEN III: OPTIMIZE PCI): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2016;388:2618–2628. 8.	 Kubo T, Shinke T, Okamura T, et al. Optical frequency domain imaging vs. intravascular ultrasound in percutaneous coronary intervention (OPINION trial): one-year angiographic and clinical results. Eur Heart J. 2017;38:3139– 3147. 9.	 Chamie D, Costa JR Jr, Damiani LP, et al. Optical coherence tomography versus intravascular ultrasound and angiography to guide percutaneous coronary interventions: the iSIGHT randomized trial. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2021;14:e009452. 10.	 Muramatsu T, Ozaki Y, Nanasato M, et al. Comparison between optical frequency domain imaging and intravascular ultrasound for percutaneous coronary intervention guidance in biolimus A9-eluting stent implantation: a randomized MISTIC-1 non-inferiority trial. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2020;13:e009314. 11.	 Stone GW, Christiansen EH, Ali ZA, et al. Intravascular imaging-guided coronary drug-eluting stent implantation: an updated network meta-analysis. Lancet. 2024;403:824–837. 12.	 Lawton JS, Tamis-Holland JE, Bangalore S, et al. 2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI

guideline for coronary artery revascularization: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2022;145:e18–e114. 13 Ladwiniec A, Walsh SJ, Holm NR, et al. Intravascular ultrasound to guide

left main stem intervention: a NOBLE trial substudy. EuroIntervention. 2020;16:201–209. 14.	 Maehara A, Matsumura M, Ali ZA, et al. IVUS-guided versus OCT-guided coronary stent implantation: a critical appraisal. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2017;10:1487–1503. 15.	 Truesdell AG, Alasnag MA, Kaul P, et al. Intravascular imaging during percutaneous coronary intervention: JACC state-of-the-art review. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2023;81:590–605. 16.	 Prati F, Romagnoli E, Burzotta F, et al. Clinical impact of OCT findings during PCI: the CLI-OPCI II study. J Am Coll Cardiol Img. 2015;8:1297–1305. 17.	 Soeda T, Uemura S, Park SJ, et al. Incidence and clinical significance of poststent optical coherence tomography findings: one-year follow-up study from a multicenter registry. Circulation. 2015;132:1020–1029. 18.	 Giacoppo D, Laudani C, Occhipinti G, et al. Coronary angiography, intra-

vascular ultrasound, and optical coherence tomography for guiding of percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and network metaanalysis. Circulation. 2024;149:1065–1086. 7.4.1. Management of Multivessel CAD in STEMI 1.	 Mehta SR, Wood DA, Storey RF, et al. Complete revascularization with multivessel PCI for myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 2019;381:1411–1421. 2.	 Gershlick AH, Khan JN, Kelly DJ, et al. Randomized trial of complete versus lesion-only revascularization in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention for STEMI and multivessel disease: the CvLPRIT trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;65:963–972. 3.	 Bainey KR, Engstroem T, Smits PC, et al. Complete vs culprit-lesion-only revascularization for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Cardiol. 2020;5:881–888. 4.	 Engstrom T, Kelbaek H, Helqvist S, 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. Lancet. 2015;386:665–671. 5.	 Di Mario C, Mara S, Flavio A, 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. Int J Cardiovasc Intervent. 2004;6:128–133. 6.	 Politi L, Sgura F, Rossi R, 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. Heart. 2010;96:662– 667. 7.	 Smits PC, Abdel-Wahab M, Neumann FJ, et al. Fractional flow reserveguided multivessel angioplasty in myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 2017;376:1234–1244. 8.	 Wald DS, Morris JK, Wald NJ, et al. Randomized trial of preventive angioplasty in myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 2013;369:1115–1123. 9.	 Mehta SR, Wang J, Wood DA, et al. Complete revascularization vs culprit lesion-only percutaneous coronary intervention for angina-related quality of life in patients with ST-segment Elevation myocardial infarction: results from the COMPLETE randomized clinical trial. JAMA Cardiol. 2022;7:1091– 1099. 10.	 Diletti R, den Dekker WK, Bennett J, et al. Immediate versus staged complete revascularisation in patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome and multivessel coronary disease (BIOVASC): a prospective, open-label, non-inferiority, randomised trial. Lancet. 2023;401:1172–1182. 11.	 Stahli BE, Varbella F, Linke A, et al. Timing of complete revascularization with multivessel PCI for myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 2023;389:1368– 1379. 12.	 Maqsood MH, Tamis-Holland JE, Rao SV, et al. Culprit-only revascularization, single-setting complete revascularization, and staged complete revascularization in acute myocardial infarction: insights from a mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis of randomized trials. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2024;17:e013737. 13.	 Thiele H, Akin I, Sandri M, et al. PCI strategies in patients with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock. N Engl J Med. 2017;377:2419–2432. 14.	 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. 15.	 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 metaanalysis. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2017;10:e005582. 16.	 Lawton JS, Tamis-Holland JE, Bangalore S, et al. 2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI

guideline for coronary artery revascularization: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2022;145:e18–e114.

Downloaded from http://ahajournals.org by on October 7, 2026