Ignacio J Amat-Santos1, Victoria Martin-Yuste2, José Antonio Fernández-Díaz3, Javier Martin-Moreiras4, Juan Caballero-Borrego5, Pablo Salinas6, Soledad Ojeda7, Fernando Rivero8, Julio Núñez Villota9, Mohsen Mohandes10, Daniela Dubois11, Francisco Bosa Ojeda12, Eva Rumiz13, José M de la Torre Hernández14, Jesús Jiménez-Mazuecos15, Javier Lacunza16, Paula Tejedor17, Itziar Gómez18, Luis R Goncalves-Ramirez18, Paol Rojas18, Manel Sabaté2, Javier Goicolea3, Alejandro Diego Nieto4, Miriam Jiménez-Fernández5, Javier Escaned6, Nieves Gonzalo6, Laura Pardo7, Javier Cuesta8, Gema Miñana9, Juan Sanchis9, Sergio Rojas10, Raúl Millán11, Beatriz Vaquerizo11, Sara Rodríguez12, Dae-Hyun Lee14, Francisco J Morales19, Alejandro Gutiérrez20, María López21, Jaume Maristany22, Juan Rondán23, Guillermo Galeote24, Zuheir Kabbanni25, Sergio Rodríguez26, Luis Teruel27, Mario Sadaba28, Alfonso Jurado29, Vicente Mainar30, Juan Sánchez-Rubio31, Hugo Vinhas32, Renato Fernandes33. 1. Servicio de Cardiología, Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Cardiovasculares (CIBERCV), Hospital Clínico Universitario, Valladolid, Spain. Electronic address: ijamat@gmail.com. 2. Servicio de Cardiología, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. 3. Servicio de Cardiología, Hospital Puerta de Hierro, Majadahonda, Madrid, Spain. 4. Servicio de Cardiología, Hospital Clínico Universitario de Salamanca, Salamanca, Spain. 5. Servicio de Cardiología, Hospital Campus de la Salud y Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, Spain. 6. Servicio de Cardiología, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain. 7. Servicio de Cardiología, Hospital Reina Sofía de Córdoba, Córdoba, Spain. 8. Servicio de Cardiología, Hospital La Princesa, Madrid, Spain. 9. Servicio de Cardiología, Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Cardiovasculares (CIBERCV), Hospital Clínic Universitari, INCLIVA, Universitat de València, Valencia, Spain. 10. Servicio de Cardiología, Hospital de Tarragona, Tarragona, Spain. 11. Servicio de Cardiología, Hospital del Mar, Barcelona, Spain. 12. Servicio de Cardiología, Hospital de Tenerife, Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Spain. 13. Servicio de Cardiología, Hospital General de Valencia, Valencia, Spain. 14. Servicio de Cardiología, Hospital Marqués de Valdecilla, Santander, Cantabria, Spain. 15. Servicio de Cardiología, Hospital Clínico Universitario de Albacete, Albacete, Spain. 16. Servicio de Cardiología, Hospital de Murcia, Murcia, Spain. 17. Servicio de Cardiología, Complejo Hospitalario de Burgos, Burgos, Spain. 18. Servicio de Cardiología, Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Cardiovasculares (CIBERCV), Hospital Clínico Universitario, Valladolid, Spain. 19. Servicio de Cardiología, Hospital Universitario Puerto Real, Puerto Real, Cádiz, Spain. 20. Servicio de Cardiología, Hospital de Jerez de la Frontera, Jerez de la Frontera, Cádiz, Spain. 21. Servicio de Cardiología, Hospital de León, León, Spain. 22. Servicio de Cardiología, Hospital Son Espases, Palma de Mallorca, Balearic Islands, Spain. 23. Servicio de Cardiología, Hospital de Cabueñes, Gijón, Asturias, Spain. 24. Servicio de Cardiología, Hospital de La Paz, Madrid, Spain. 25. Servicio de Cardiología, Hospital Hospiten, Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Spain. 26. Servicio de Cardiología, Hospital Virgen Macarena, Sevilla, Spain. 27. Servicio de Cardiología, Hospital de Bellvitge, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain. 28. Servicio de Cardiología, Hospital Galdakao, Galdakao, Vizcaya, Spain. 29. Servicio de Cardiología, Hospital de Ciudad Real, Ciudad Real, Spain. 30. Servicio de Cardiología, Hospital de Alicante, Alicante, Spain. 31. Servicio de Cardiología, Hospital Clínico de Zaragoza, Zaragoza, Spain. 32. Servicio de Cardiología, Hospital García de Orta, Almada, Portugal. 33. Servicio de Cardiología, Hospital Espírito Santo, Evora, Portugal.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: There is current controversy regarding the benefits of percutaneous recanalization (PCI) of chronic total coronary occlusions (CTO). Our aim was to determine acute and follow-up outcomes in our setting. METHODS: Two-year prospective registry of consecutive patients undergoing PCI of CTO in 24 centers. RESULTS: A total of 1000 PCIs of CTO were performed in 952 patients. Most were symptomatic (81.5%), with chronic ischemic heart disease (59.2%). Previous recanalization attempts had been made in 15%. The mean SYNTAX score was 19.5 ± 10.6 and J-score was > 2 in 17.3%. A retrograde procedure was performed in 92 patients (9.2%). The success rate was 74.9% and was higher in patients without previous attempts (82.2% vs 75.2%; P = .001), those with a J-score ≤ 2 (80.5% vs 69.5%; P = .002), and in intravascular ultrasound-guided PCI (89.9% vs 76.2%, P = .001), which was an independent predictor of success. In contrast, severe calcification, length > 20mm, and blunt proximal cap were independent predictors of failed recanalization. The rate of procedural complications was 7.1%, including perforation (3%), myocardial infarction (1.3%), and death (0.5%). At 1-year of follow-up, 88.2% of successfully revascularized patients showed clinical improvement (vs 34.8%, P < .001), which was associated with lower mortality. At 1-year of follow-up, the mortality rate was 1.5%. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with other national registries, patients in the Iberian registry undergoing PCI of a CTO showed similar complexity, success rate, and complications. Successful recanalization was strongly associated with functional improvement, which was related to lower mortality.
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: There is current controversy regarding the benefits of percutaneous recanalization (PCI) of chronic total coronary occlusions (CTO). Our aim was to determine acute and follow-up outcomes in our setting. METHODS: Two-year prospective registry of consecutive patients undergoing PCI of CTO in 24 centers. RESULTS: A total of 1000 PCIs of CTO were performed in 952 patients. Most were symptomatic (81.5%), with chronic ischemic heart disease (59.2%). Previous recanalization attempts had been made in 15%. The mean SYNTAX score was 19.5 ± 10.6 and J-score was > 2 in 17.3%. A retrograde procedure was performed in 92 patients (9.2%). The success rate was 74.9% and was higher in patients without previous attempts (82.2% vs 75.2%; P = .001), those with a J-score ≤ 2 (80.5% vs 69.5%; P = .002), and in intravascular ultrasound-guided PCI (89.9% vs 76.2%, P = .001), which was an independent predictor of success. In contrast, severe calcification, length > 20mm, and blunt proximal cap were independent predictors of failed recanalization. The rate of procedural complications was 7.1%, including perforation (3%), myocardial infarction (1.3%), and death (0.5%). At 1-year of follow-up, 88.2% of successfully revascularized patients showed clinical improvement (vs 34.8%, P < .001), which was associated with lower mortality. At 1-year of follow-up, the mortality rate was 1.5%. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with other national registries, patients in the Iberian registry undergoing PCI of a CTO showed similar complexity, success rate, and complications. Successful recanalization was strongly associated with functional improvement, which was related to lower mortality.
Authors: Pablo Salinas; Nieves Gonzalo; Víctor H Moreno; Manuel Fuentes; Sandra Santos-Martinez; José Antonio Fernandez-Diaz; Ignacio J Amat-Santos; Francisco Bosa Ojeda; Juan Caballero Borrego; Javier Cuesta; José María de la Torre Hernández; Alejandro Diego-Nieto; Daniela Dubois; Guillermo Galeote; Javier Goicolea; Alejandro Gutiérrez; Miriam Jiménez-Fernández; Jesús Jiménez-Mazuecos; Alfonso Jurado; Javier Lacunza; Dae-Hyun Lee; María López; Fernando Lozano; Javier Martin-Moreiras; Victoria Martin-Yuste; Raúl Millán; Gema Miñana; Mohsen Mohandes; Francisco J Morales-Ponce; Julio Núñez; Soledad Ojeda; Manuel Pan; Fernando Rivero; Javier Robles; Sergio Rodríguez-Leiras; Sergio Rojas; Juan Rondán; Eva Rumiz; Manel Sabaté; Juan Sanchís; Beatriz Vaquerizo; Javier Escaned Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-04-02 Impact factor: 3.240