| Literature DB >> 28724418 |
Joëlle Elias1, Ivo M van Dongen1, Loes P Hoebers1, Dagmar M Ouweneel1, Bimmer E P M Claessen1, Truls Råmunddal2, Peep Laanmets3, Erlend Eriksen4, René J van der Schaaf5, Dan Ioanes2, Robin Nijveldt6, Jan G Tijssen1, Alexander Hirsch7, José P S Henriques8,9.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Evaluating Xience and left ventricular function in PCI on occlusiOns afteR STEMI (EXPLORE) trial did not show a significant benefit of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of the concurrent chronic total occlusion (CTO) in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients on global left ventricular (LV) systolic function. However a possible treatment effect will be most pronounced in the CTO territory. Therefore, we aimed to study the effect of CTO PCI compared to no-CTO PCI on the recovery of regional LV function, particularly in the CTO territory.Entities:
Keywords: CTO; LV function; PCI; STEMI
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28724418 PMCID: PMC5517806 DOI: 10.1186/s12968-017-0369-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson ISSN: 1097-6647 Impact factor: 5.364
Fig. 1Flowchart included patients. CMR = cardiovascular magnetic resonance, CTO = chronic total occlusion, PCI = percutaneous coronary intervention
Baseline characteristics of STEMI patients with a CTO, stratified for the randomization outcome, in total group and in patients with serial CMR
| Serial CMR ( | Total ( | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CTO-PCI | No CTO-PCI ( | CTO-PCI | No CTO-PCI |
| |
| Age (years, mean, SD) | 60(10) | 60(10) | 60(10) | 60(10) | 0.81 |
| Male gender (%) | 73(91) | 84(84) | 131(89) | 126(82) | 0.25 |
| Diabetes (%) | 13(16) | 14(14) | 22(15) | 25(16) | 0.75 |
| Hypertension (%) | 30(38) | 48(48) | 59(40) | 69(45) | 0.72 |
| Family history of CAD (%) | 32(40) | 38(38) | 66(45) | 64(42) | 0.10 |
| Hypercholesterolaemia (%) | 27(34) | 33(33) | 51(35) | 52(34) | 0.81 |
| Current smoker (%) | 40(50) | 52(52) | 77(52) | 76(49) | 0.97 |
| Previous MI (%) | 9(11) | 17(17) | 19(13) | 24(16) | 1.0 |
| Previous PCI (%) | 5(6) | 13(13) | 9(6) | 16(10) | 0.21 |
| Previous stroke (%) | 2(3) | 3(3) | 5(3) | 6(4) | 0.36 |
| Primary PCI | |||||
| Infarct related artery | 0.77 | ||||
| Right coronary artery (%) | 26(32) | 31(31) | 46(31) | 47(31) | |
| Left circumflex artery (%) | 15(19) | 30(30) | 30(20) | 43(28) | |
| Left anterior descending artery/LM (%) | 39(49) | 39(39) | 72(49) | 64(42) | |
| Three vessel disease (%) | 34(43) | 42(42) | 62(42) | 67(44) | 0.91 |
| MI SYNTAX score I (pre-PCI) | 30(8) | 29(10) | 29(8) | 29(10) | 0.57 |
| MI SYNTAX score II (wiring/balloon/aspiration) | 28(8) | 26(10) | 27(8) | 27(10) | 0.62 |
| Infarct size | |||||
| Peak CK-MB (median, IQR) | 133(38–198) | 87(39–199) | 130(39–272) | 111(43–256) | 0.14 |
| Peak Troponin T(median, IQR) | 3.1(1.3–7.8) | 2.9(0.9–5.6) | 3.1(1.1–7.8) | 3.3(0.9–6.0) | 0.23 |
| LVEF before randomization a | 41(12) | 42(12) | 41(11) | 42(12) | 0.97 |
| CTO characteristics | |||||
| Patients with multiple CTOs b | 11(14) | 13(13) | 13(9) | 22(14) | 0.28 |
| CTO related artery | 0.61 | ||||
| Right coronary artery | 32(40) | 54(54) | 46(43) | 78(51) | |
| Left circumflex artery | 23(29) | 24(24) | 48(32) | 37(24) | |
| Left anterior descending artery | 25(31) | 22(22) | 36(24) | 39(25) | |
| CTO Collaterals Rentrop Grade 2–3 | 48(60) | 53(53) | 80(54) | 82(53) | 0.30 |
| Total J-CTO score (mean, SD) | 2.0(1.1) | 2.2(1.1) | 2.1(1.1) | 2.3(1.1) | 0.07 |
| Previously failed lesion | 1(1) | 4(4) | 2(1) | 4(3) | 0.41 |
| Blunt stump | 17(21) | 27(27) | 33(22) | 45(29) | 0.51 |
| Bending | 50(63) | 68(68) | 98(66) | 108(70) | 0.26 |
| Calcification | 58(73) | 81(81) | 115(78) | 132(86) | 0.02 |
| Occlusion length ≥ 20 mm | 30(38) | 43(43) | 60(40) | 68(44) | 0.48 |
Data are number of patients (%), mean (SD) or median (IQR)
PCI percutaneous coronary intervention, CK-MB creatine kinase-MB isoenzyme, CTO chronic total occlusion, J-CTO Multicenter CTO registry of Japan, CMR cardiovascular magnetic resonance
*p-value for patients with serial CMR versus patients without serial CMR
aImaging modality is CMR only; data available in 201 patients
bFor patients with multiple CTOs, the CTO supplying the largest amount of myocardium was defined as the main CTO
Serial CMR outcomes: Recovery of global functional outcomes in the total CMR population
| Total CMR population | CTO PCI ( | No-CTO PCI ( |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Left ventricular ejection fraction (%) | |||
| Baseline | 40.6 (11.8) | 41.7 (12.1) | 0.55 |
| 4 months FU | 45.3 (11.6) | 45.5 (11.8) | 0.87 |
| Δ LVEF | 4.6 (8.3) | 3.8 (8.1) | 0.52 |
| Left ventricular end-diastolic volume (ml) | |||
| Baseline | 210.1 (53.4) | 209.5 (55.1) | 0.95 |
| 4 months FU | 215.6 (54.6) | 212.5 (53.9) | 0.71 |
| Δ LVEDV | 5.5 (32.4) | 3.0 (25.7) | 0.57 |
| Infarct size (g) a | |||
| Baseline | 11.7 (10.5) | 11.9(11.1) | 0.94 |
| 4 months FU | 7.5 (6.4) | 7.1 (5.4) | 0.70 |
| Δ Infarct size | −4.3 (8.0) | −4.8 (8.6) | 0.72 |
Data are number of patients (n)
CMR cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, CTO chronic total occlusion, PCI percutaneous coronary intervention, LAD left anterior descending artery, LVEF left ventricular ejection fraction, LVEDV left ventricular end-diastolic volume
aInfarct data available in 60 and 68 patients
Serial CMR outcomes: Recovery of regional segmental outcomes (SWT), in the total CMR population and according to the territory at risk
| Segmental Wall thickening (%, SD) | Total | CTO territory | IRA territory | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| All segments | CTO PCI | No-CTO PCI |
| CTO-PCI | No-CTO PCI |
| CTO PCI | No-CTO PCI |
|
| Baseline | 41 (34) | 43 (34) | – | 44 (35) | 40 (33) | – | 31 (28) | 33 (31) | – |
| 4 mo | 48 (32) | 46 (33) | – | 49 (33) | 43 (31) | – | 42 (32) | 42 (34) | – |
| Absolute difference | 7 (30) | 4 (30) | – | 5 (31) | 3 (28) | 0.09 | 11 (28) | 8 (30) | – |
| Dysfunctional segments | CTO PCI | No-CTO PCI |
| CTO PCI | No-CTO PCI |
| CTO PCI | No-CTO PCI |
|
| Baseline | 20 (15) | 19 (16) | – | 21 (16) | 19 (16) | – | 18 (15) | 16 (17) | – |
| 4 mo | 36 (28) | 31 (25) | 0.05 | 37 (30) | 30 (24) | 0.02 | 33 (27) | 30 (26) | – |
| Absolute difference | 16 (26) | 13 (24) | 0.06 | 17 (27) | 11 (23) | 0.03 | 16 (24) | 14 (25) | – |
| Dysfunctional and TEI <50% | CTO PCI | No-CTO PCI |
| CTO PCI | No-CTO PCI |
| CTO PCI | No-CTO PCI |
|
| Baseline | 21 (15) | 20 (16) | – | 22 (16) | 20 (16) | – | 20 (14) | 18 (16) | – |
| 4 mo | 38 (28) | 33 (25) | 0.05 | 40 (30) | 31 (23) | 0.01 | 37 (27) | 33 (26) | – |
| Absolute difference | 16 (26) | 13 (24) | 0.06 | 17 (27) | 11 (22) | 0.02 | 17 (25) | 15 (25) | – |
| Dysfunctional and TEI >50% | CTO PCI | No-CTO PCI |
| CTO-PCI | No-CTO PCI |
| CTO PCI | No-CTO PCI |
|
| Baseline | 8 (12) | 3 (15) | – | 3 (14) | 7 (13) | – | 9 (12) | 2 (16) | – |
| 4 mo | 18 (17) | 15 (21) | – | 20 (15) | 10 (15) | – | 18 (18) | 14 (21) | – |
| Absolute difference | 11 (17) | 12 (24) | – | 16 (20) | 3 (18) | – | 9 (16) | 12 (24) | – |
Data are percentage of segmental wall thickening (± SD)
S number of segments, CMR cardiovascular magnetic resonance, CTO chronic total occlusion, PCI percutaneous coronary intervention, IRA infarct-related artery, SWT segmental wall thickening, TEI transmural extend of infarction
*Outcomes were analyzed using multilevel analysis (linear regression), only p-values ≤0.10 are given
Fig. 2Changes in regional left ventricular function in segments in the CTO territory, comparing CTO PCI versus no-CTO PCI. Change in percentage segmental wall thickening (SWT) in all segments and dysfunctional segments in the CTO territory (a and b). Recovery of SWT was compared between baseline and 4 month follow-up in segments and between CTO PCI and no-CTO PCI (*)
Fig. 3Changes in regional left ventricular function in segments in the CTO territory in Rentrop grade 2–3 collaterals versus grade 0–1 collaterals, comparing CTO PCI versus no-CTO PCI. Change in percentage segmental wall thickening (SWT) in all segments (a) and dysfunctional segments (b) in the CTO territory comparing Rentrop grade 2–3 collaterals versus grade 0–1 collaterals. Recovery of SWT was compared between baseline and 4 month follow-up