BACKGROUND: The frequency and outcomes of guide catheter extension use during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) have received limited study. METHODS: We retrospectively examined 1539 consecutive PCIs performed between May 2010 and November 2013 to determine the frequency and outcomes of guide catheter extension utilization. RESULTS: During the study period, a guide catheter extension was used in 83 cases (5.4%; 95% confidence interval, 4.3%-6.6%) in 86 vessels. The PCI target vessel was the left anterior descending artery (11%), circumflex (23%), right coronary artery (50%), left main (1%), or a saphenous vein bypass graft (15%). The indications for use (non-mutually exclusive) were to facilitate equipment delivery or provide vessel support/ engagement (84.7%), thrombus aspiration (10.5%), retrieval of lost devices (2.3%), facilitation of reverse controlled antegrade and retrograde tracking and dissection (1%), and selective vessel visualization with contrast (1%). Guide catheter extension success rate was 73.3% and technical and procedural success rates were 91.6% and 90.4%, respectively. Four patients (4.8%) experienced a guide catheter extension-related complication: vessel dissection/injury in 2 cases (1 case required emergency coronary artery bypass graft surgery and 1 case required stenting) and equipment loss in 2 cases (1 detachment of the distal guide-extension marker and 1 shearing of a guidewire tip that embolized to the renal artery). CONCLUSIONS: In a contemporary patient population undergoing PCI, a guide catheter extension was used in approximately 1 of 20 PCIs. Guide catheter extensions can facilitate procedural success, but also carry low risk for device-related complications.
BACKGROUND: The frequency and outcomes of guide catheter extension use during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) have received limited study. METHODS: We retrospectively examined 1539 consecutive PCIs performed between May 2010 and November 2013 to determine the frequency and outcomes of guide catheter extension utilization. RESULTS: During the study period, a guide catheter extension was used in 83 cases (5.4%; 95% confidence interval, 4.3%-6.6%) in 86 vessels. The PCI target vessel was the left anterior descending artery (11%), circumflex (23%), right coronary artery (50%), left main (1%), or a saphenous vein bypass graft (15%). The indications for use (non-mutually exclusive) were to facilitate equipment delivery or provide vessel support/ engagement (84.7%), thrombus aspiration (10.5%), retrieval of lost devices (2.3%), facilitation of reverse controlled antegrade and retrograde tracking and dissection (1%), and selective vessel visualization with contrast (1%). Guide catheter extension success rate was 73.3% and technical and procedural success rates were 91.6% and 90.4%, respectively. Four patients (4.8%) experienced a guide catheter extension-related complication: vessel dissection/injury in 2 cases (1 case required emergency coronary artery bypass graft surgery and 1 case required stenting) and equipment loss in 2 cases (1 detachment of the distal guide-extension marker and 1 shearing of a guidewire tip that embolized to the renal artery). CONCLUSIONS: In a contemporary patient population undergoing PCI, a guide catheter extension was used in approximately 1 of 20 PCIs. Guide catheter extensions can facilitate procedural success, but also carry low risk for device-related complications.