Abstract Body

ST- Segment Elevation Acute Myocardial Infarction (STEMI) represents a medical emergency that reflects high mortality rates, reaching 80% in the first 24 hours. Besides, one of the most notable complications associated with this emergency is Cardiogenic Shock (CS), which affects about 10% of patients. METHODS: Considering the incidence of cases, as well as the severity of STEMI related to CS, this study will search for understanding the treatment established in this population, intending to determine the differences between the treatment of multivessel revascularization or just the culprit artery. RESULTS: Furthermore, in this perspective, studies have shown that exclusively clinical treatment is unfavorable compared to revascularization, being the invasive approach with the greatest chance of success, indicating higher survival rates of patients when introduced early treatment. In addition, among the possible approaches, we have revascularization of only the culprit artery and the multivessel; in relation to multivessel treatment, it can be mentioned as benefits of this technique, the reduction of the ischemic load and the reduction of the need for future intervention; however, on the other hand, the patients time in the procedure is enhanced, increasing the risk of complications such as contrast-induced nephropathy. CONCLUSION: Thus, taking into account the guidelines of the European Society of Cardiology and the American Heart Association (AHA), revascularization is recommended through percutaneous intervention of the culprit artery for the ischemic event instead of multivessel unblocking. Consequently, complications and associated mortality decrease, quitting the reperfusion of additional affected arteries for another moment.