CULPRIT-SHOCK
PCI strategies in patients with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock
On this page
Overview
In MI with cardiogenic shock, culprit-only PCI beat immediate multivessel PCI for death or renal failure.
Clinical takeaway
CULPRIT-SHOCK changed cath-lab strategy in shock: stabilize the culprit lesion first rather than routinely fixing every stenosis immediately.
Key result
Death or renal-replacement therapy at 30 days was lower with culprit-only PCI.
Practice impact
Favor culprit-only PCI first in AMI cardiogenic shock with multivessel disease, with staged PCI when appropriate.
Evidence
Study design
Randomized open-label trial.
Enrollment
706
Follow-up
30 days for primary outcome.
Geography
Europe
Clinical question
In AMI with cardiogenic shock and multivessel disease, is culprit-only PCI better than immediate multivessel PCI?
Population
- Patients with acute myocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock, and multivessel coronary artery disease.
Intervention
PCI of the culprit lesion only, with option for staged revascularization.
Comparator
Immediate multivessel PCI.
Primary outcome
Composite of death or severe renal failure requiring renal-replacement therapy at 30 days.
Culprit-lesion-only PCI reduced death or renal-replacement therapy compared with immediate multivessel PCI.
Relative risk / 0.83 / CI 95% CI 0.71-0.96 / p=0.01
Key results
- Primary composite was lower with culprit-only PCI.
- All-cause mortality was lower with culprit-only PCI at 30 days.
- Renal-replacement therapy was numerically lower with culprit-only PCI.
Harms
- Leaving nonculprit lesions untreated initially can require staged revascularization.
- PCI in shock carries contrast, bleeding, vascular, and hemodynamic risks.
Clinical Use
When to cite
- When deciding culprit-only versus multivessel PCI during AMI cardiogenic shock.
Practice impact
- Shifted guidelines away from routine immediate multivessel PCI in AMI-related cardiogenic shock.
Applicability
- AMI cardiogenic shock patients with multivessel coronary disease undergoing PCI.
Limitations
- Does not apply to stable STEMI without shock, where complete revascularization evidence differs.
- Anatomic exceptions may require individualized decisions.
Common misinterpretations
- Do not apply CULPRIT-SHOCK to stable multivessel STEMI; shock changes the risk-benefit balance.
Related evidence
Citation
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(25):2419-2432. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1710261
- PMID
- 29083953