Poll Results: CULPRIT-SHOCK Trial

The most recently completed poll on the Invasive Cardiovascular Angiography and Intervention Clinical Topic Collection asked questions about what effect, if any, the CULPRIT-SHOCK (Culprit Lesion Only PCI Versus Multivessel PCI in Cardiogenic Shock) trial will have on practice. The results are shown below. Sixty-five percent of responders chose "Yes," and 35% chose "No." Of those who chose "Yes," 73% indicated that they would focus on the culprit artery. Of the responders who stated that the trial would not affect their practice, 51% responded "Yes" to continued revascularization excluding chronic total occlusions (CTOs). When asked differently, if they would continue doing complete revascularization, only 17% stated complete revascularization including a CTO vessel. The CULPRIT-SHOCK trial recommended CTO percutaneous coronary intervention as part of a complete strategy. The last two questions intended to assess the likelihood that operators have and continue to exclude CTOs as a part of a strategy of complete revascularization in acute myocardial infarction.

My interpretation is that a significant number of responders have been influenced by the trial, but, despite that, CTOs are not a part of their complete revascularization strategy. One wonders to what extent "forced" CTO treatment may have adversely effected the study results. Thanks to all of you who participated.

Poll Results

Poll Results

Poll Results

Poll Results

Clinical Topics: Heart Failure and Cardiomyopathies, Invasive Cardiovascular Angiography and Intervention, Acute Heart Failure, Interventions and Imaging, Angiography, Nuclear Imaging

Keywords: Shock, Cardiogenic, Percutaneous Coronary Intervention, Myocardium, Risk, Angiography, Myocardial Infarction, Shock


< Back to Listings