Jeffrey W Chambers1, Charles Warner2, Josh Cortez3, Ann N Behrens4, Dylan T Wrede5, Brad J Martinsen6. 1. Metropolitan Heart and Vascular Institute, The Heart Center, Suite 120, 4040 Coon Rapids Boulevard, Minneapolis, MN 55433, USA. Electronic address: j.chambers@mhvi.com. 2. Metropolitan Heart and Vascular Institute, The Heart Center, Suite 120, 4040 Coon Rapids Boulevard, Minneapolis, MN 55433, USA. Electronic address: charlie.warner@mhvi.com. 3. Metropolitan Heart and Vascular Institute, The Heart Center, Suite 120, 4040 Coon Rapids Boulevard, Minneapolis, MN 55433, USA. 4. Scientific and Clinical Affairs, Cardiovascular Systems, Inc., 1225 Old Highway 8 NW, St. Paul, MN 55112, USA. Electronic address: abehrens@csi360.com. 5. Scientific and Clinical Affairs, Cardiovascular Systems, Inc., 1225 Old Highway 8 NW, St. Paul, MN 55112, USA. Electronic address: dwrede@csi360.com. 6. Scientific and Clinical Affairs, Cardiovascular Systems, Inc., 1225 Old Highway 8 NW, St. Paul, MN 55112, USA. Electronic address: bmartinsen@csi360.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Coronary bifurcation and calcified lesions account for 15-20% and 6%-20% of percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI), respectively. Treatment of these lesions is associated with high periprocedural complication rates and unfavorable long-term clinical outcomes, including high rates of revascularization. This retrospective, single-center study evaluated the outcomes of atherectomy treatment for heavily calcified coronary bifurcation lesions. METHODS: Patients who underwent a coronary atherectomy procedure to treat a heavily calcified lesion between January 2010 and March 2016 at Metropolitan Heart and Vascular Institute (Minneapolis, MN) were included in this retrospective study. Data were stratified to compare atherectomy treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions vs non-bifurcation lesions. Additionally, data were compared based on type of atherectomy utilized during the index procedure, either orbital (OAS) or rotational (RA) atherectomy. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as a composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), and target vessel revascularization (TVR), were assessed at 30 days post-procedure. RESULTS: Among the 177 patients treated with atherectomy, 72 patients had bifurcation lesions. Compared to patients with non-bifurcation lesions, patients with bifurcation lesions were more likely to have a history of prior PCI or coronary artery bypass grafting. Bifurcation lesions required a higher volume of contrast. There were similar low rates of slow flow/no-reflow (2.8% bifurcations vs 1.0% non-bifurcation; p = 0.355). The 30-day rates of death (1.4% vs 1.9%; p = 0.794), MI (0% vs 0%; p = NA), and TVR (0% vs 1.0%; p = 0.406) were similar in patients with bifurcation lesions versus those without, respectively. An atherectomy sub-analysis (OAS vs RA) of the patients with bifurcation lesions showed that OAS utilization was associated with shorter procedure time (81 min vs 109 min; p = 0.026) and fluoroscopy time (18 min vs 27 min; p = 0.007) compared to RA, respectively-no significant differences in baseline demographic or lesion characteristics were noted in the bifurcation atherectomy sub-groups, except for higher beta/calcium blocker use in RA bifurcation subjects. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study demonstrated that atherectomy treatment in patients with heavily calcified coronary bifurcation lesions is feasible, resulting in similar low 30-day MACE rates as compared to patients with non-bifurcation lesions. In addition, in this study OAS utilization versus RA in bifurcation lesions was associated with significantly shorter procedure and fluoroscopy time. Further studies are needed to assess the safety and efficacy of atherectomy in patients with severely calcified bifurcation lesions. SUMMARY FOR ANNOTATED TABLE OF CONTENTS: This retrospective, single-center study evaluated the outcomes of orbital and rotational atherectomy treatment for heavily calcified coronary bifurcation lesions as compared to non-bifurcation lesions. The results demonstrate that atherectomy treatment in patients with heavily calcified coronary bifurcation lesions is feasible, resulting in similarly low 30-day MACE rates as compared to patients with non-bifurcation lesions. In addition, in this study OAS utilization versus RA in bifurcation lesions was associated with significantly shorter procedure and fluoroscopy time.
BACKGROUND: Coronary bifurcation and calcified lesions account for 15-20% and 6%-20% of percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI), respectively. Treatment of these lesions is associated with high periprocedural complication rates and unfavorable long-term clinical outcomes, including high rates of revascularization. This retrospective, single-center study evaluated the outcomes of atherectomy treatment for heavily calcified coronary bifurcation lesions. METHODS:Patients who underwent a coronary atherectomy procedure to treat a heavily calcified lesion between January 2010 and March 2016 at Metropolitan Heart and Vascular Institute (Minneapolis, MN) were included in this retrospective study. Data were stratified to compare atherectomy treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions vs non-bifurcation lesions. Additionally, data were compared based on type of atherectomy utilized during the index procedure, either orbital (OAS) or rotational (RA) atherectomy. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as a composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), and target vessel revascularization (TVR), were assessed at 30 days post-procedure. RESULTS: Among the 177 patients treated with atherectomy, 72 patients had bifurcation lesions. Compared to patients with non-bifurcation lesions, patients with bifurcation lesions were more likely to have a history of prior PCI or coronary artery bypass grafting. Bifurcation lesions required a higher volume of contrast. There were similar low rates of slow flow/no-reflow (2.8% bifurcations vs 1.0% non-bifurcation; p = 0.355). The 30-day rates of death (1.4% vs 1.9%; p = 0.794), MI (0% vs 0%; p = NA), and TVR (0% vs 1.0%; p = 0.406) were similar in patients with bifurcation lesions versus those without, respectively. An atherectomy sub-analysis (OAS vs RA) of the patients with bifurcation lesions showed that OAS utilization was associated with shorter procedure time (81 min vs 109 min; p = 0.026) and fluoroscopy time (18 min vs 27 min; p = 0.007) compared to RA, respectively-no significant differences in baseline demographic or lesion characteristics were noted in the bifurcation atherectomy sub-groups, except for higher beta/calcium blocker use in RA bifurcation subjects. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study demonstrated that atherectomy treatment in patients with heavily calcified coronary bifurcation lesions is feasible, resulting in similar low 30-day MACE rates as compared to patients with non-bifurcation lesions. In addition, in this study OAS utilization versus RA in bifurcation lesions was associated with significantly shorter procedure and fluoroscopy time. Further studies are needed to assess the safety and efficacy of atherectomy in patients with severely calcified bifurcation lesions. SUMMARY FOR ANNOTATED TABLE OF CONTENTS: This retrospective, single-center study evaluated the outcomes of orbital and rotational atherectomy treatment for heavily calcified coronary bifurcation lesions as compared to non-bifurcation lesions. The results demonstrate that atherectomy treatment in patients with heavily calcified coronary bifurcation lesions is feasible, resulting in similarly low 30-day MACE rates as compared to patients with non-bifurcation lesions. In addition, in this study OAS utilization versus RA in bifurcation lesions was associated with significantly shorter procedure and fluoroscopy time.
Authors: Allison B Hall; Ivan Chavez; Santiago Garcia; Mario Gössl; Anil Poulose; Paul Sorajja; Yale Wang; Yves Louvard; Yiannis S Chatzizisis; Subhash Banerjee; Iosif Xenogiannis; M Nicholas Burke; Emmanouil S Brilakis Journal: EuroIntervention Date: 2021-07-20 Impact factor: 6.534