BACKGROUND: We assessed efficacy and safety of chronic total occlusion (CTO) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using antegrade dissection re-entry (ADR). METHODS: We examined outcomes of ADR among 1313 CTO PCIs performed at 11 US centers between 2012-2015. RESULTS: 84.1% of patients were men. Prevalence of prior coronary artery bypass graft surgery was 34.3%. Overall technical and procedural success were 90.1% and 88.7%, respectively. In-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) occurred in 31 patients (2.4%). ADR was used in 458 cases (34.9%), and was the first strategy in 169 cases (12.9%). ADR cases were angiographically more complex than non-ADR cases (mean J-CTO score: 2.8±1.2 vs. 2.4±1.2, p<0.001). ADR was performed using the CrossBoss catheter in 246 of 458 (53.7%) and the Stingray system in 251 ADR cases (54.8%). Compared with non-ADR cases, ADR cases had lower technical (86.9% vs. 91.8%, p=0.005) and procedural success (85.0% vs. 90.7%, p=0.002), but similar risk for MACE (2.9% vs. 2.2%, p=0.42). ADR was associated with longer procedure and fluoroscopy time, and higher patient air kerma dose and contrast volume (all p<0.001). After excluding retrograde cases, ADR and antegrade wire escalation (AWE) had similar technical success (92.7% vs. 94.2%, p=0.43), procedural success (91.8% vs. 94.1%, p=0.23), and MACE (2.1% vs. 0.6%, p=0.12). CONCLUSIONS: ADR is used relatively frequently in contemporary CTO PCI, especially for challenging lesions and after failure of other strategies. ADR is associated with similar success rates and risk for complications as compared with AWE, and is important for achieving high procedural success. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.
BACKGROUND: We assessed efficacy and safety of chronic total occlusion (CTO) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using antegrade dissection re-entry (ADR). METHODS: We examined outcomes of ADR among 1313 CTO PCIs performed at 11 US centers between 2012-2015. RESULTS: 84.1% of patients were men. Prevalence of prior coronary artery bypass graft surgery was 34.3%. Overall technical and procedural success were 90.1% and 88.7%, respectively. In-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) occurred in 31 patients (2.4%). ADR was used in 458 cases (34.9%), and was the first strategy in 169 cases (12.9%). ADR cases were angiographically more complex than non-ADR cases (mean J-CTO score: 2.8±1.2 vs. 2.4±1.2, p<0.001). ADR was performed using the CrossBoss catheter in 246 of 458 (53.7%) and the Stingray system in 251 ADR cases (54.8%). Compared with non-ADR cases, ADR cases had lower technical (86.9% vs. 91.8%, p=0.005) and procedural success (85.0% vs. 90.7%, p=0.002), but similar risk for MACE (2.9% vs. 2.2%, p=0.42). ADR was associated with longer procedure and fluoroscopy time, and higher patient air kerma dose and contrast volume (all p<0.001). After excluding retrograde cases, ADR and antegrade wire escalation (AWE) had similar technical success (92.7% vs. 94.2%, p=0.43), procedural success (91.8% vs. 94.1%, p=0.23), and MACE (2.1% vs. 0.6%, p=0.12). CONCLUSIONS: ADR is used relatively frequently in contemporary CTO PCI, especially for challenging lesions and after failure of other strategies. ADR is associated with similar success rates and risk for complications as compared with AWE, and is important for achieving high procedural success. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.
Entities:
Keywords:
Chronic total occlusion; Complications; Dissection and re-entry; Outcomes; Techniques
Authors: Khaldoon Alaswad; Rohan V Menon; Georgios Christopoulos; William L Lombardi; Dimitri Karmpaliotis; J Aaron Grantham; Steven P Marso; Michael R Wyman; Nagendra R Pokala; Siddharth M Patel; Anna P Kotsia; Bavana V Rangan; Nicholas Lembo; David Kandzari; James Lee; Anna Kalynych; Harold Carlson; Santiago A Garcia; Craig A Thompson; Subhash Banerjee; Emmanouil S Brilakis Journal: Catheter Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2015-02-03 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Georgios Christopoulos; Dimitri Karmpaliotis; Khaldoon Alaswad; Robert W Yeh; Farouc A Jaffer; R Michael Wyman; William L Lombardi; Rohan V Menon; J Aaron Grantham; David E Kandzari; Nicholas Lembo; Jeffrey W Moses; Ajay J Kirtane; Manish Parikh; Philip Green; Matthew Finn; Santiago Garcia; Anthony Doing; Mitul Patel; John Bahadorani; Muhammad Nauman J Tarar; Georgios E Christakopoulos; Craig A Thompson; Subhash Banerjee; Emmanouil S Brilakis Journal: Int J Cardiol Date: 2015-06-27 Impact factor: 4.164
Authors: Jakub Drozd; Julian Strange; Agnieszka Wysokińska; Grzegorz Sobieszek; Michał Tomaszewski Journal: Kardiol Pol Date: 2015 Impact factor: 3.108
Authors: Patrick L Whitlow; M Nicholas Burke; William L Lombardi; R Michael Wyman; Jeffrey W Moses; Emmanouil S Brilakis; Richard R Heuser; Charanjit S Rihal; Alexandra J Lansky; Craig A Thompson Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2012-04 Impact factor: 11.195
Authors: Judit Karacsonyi; Khaldoon Alaswad; Farouc A Jaffer; Robert W Yeh; Mitul Patel; John Bahadorani; Aris Karatasakis; Barbara A Danek; Anthony Doing; J Aaron Grantham; Dimitri Karmpaliotis; Jeffrey W Moses; Ajay Kirtane; Manish Parikh; Ziad Ali; William L Lombardi; David E Kandzari; Nicholas Lembo; Santiago Garcia; Michael R Wyman; Aya Alame; Phuong-Khanh J Nguyen-Trong; Erica Resendes; Pratik Kalsaria; Bavana V Rangan; Imre Ungi; Craig A Thompson; Subhash Banerjee; Emmanouil S Brilakis Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2016-08-20 Impact factor: 5.501