| Literature DB >> 33880327 |
Khaled Abdel-Azim Shokry1, El-Sayed Mohamed Farag2, Ahmed Mohamed Salem2, Ismail Mohamed Ibrahim2, Mahmoud Abel-Aziz3, Ahmed El Zayat3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIM: Successful coronary chronic total occlusion (CTO) revascularization was found by many studies to be associated with improved left ventricular (LV) systolic function and survival if evidence of viability is present. Little is known about the association of CTO revascularization in patients with electrocardiographic Q waves and improvement in angina burden as a measurement of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) afterwards.Entities:
Keywords: Angina frequency; CMR; Chronic total occlusion; Health-related quality of life; Pathological Q waves; Percutaneous coronary intervention
Year: 2021 PMID: 33880327 PMCID: PMC8051329 DOI: 10.37616/2212-5043.1239
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Saudi Heart Assoc ISSN: 1016-7315
Baseline characteristics between Q waves & no Q waves groups.
| Q waves (N = 48) | No Q waves (N = 52) | p- value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years), Mean ± SD | 59.2 ± 8.7 | 58.1 ± 5.3 | 0.79 |
| Male Gender, n (%) | 40 (83.3%) | 45 (86.5%) | 0.89 |
| Diabetes mellitus, n (%) | 26 (54.2%) | 30 (57.6%) | 0.91 |
| Hypertension, n (%) | 33 (68.7%) | 38 (73.1%) | 0.61 |
| Dyslipidemia, n (%) | 24 (50%) | 28 (46.7%) | 0.81 |
| Current smoking, n (%) | 33 (68.7%) | 39 (75%) | 0.31 |
| Family history of premature CAD, n (%) | 11 (22.9%) | 14 (26.9%) | 0.87 |
| SAQ (Total score), (Mean ± SD) | 31.2 ± 11.7 | 45.3 ± 13.9 | 0.002 |
| CMR measurements | |||
| LVEF (%) | 42.3 ± 12.1 | 51.2 ± 10.3 | 0.01 |
| WMSI (Mean ± SD) | 1.7 ± 0.42 | 1.5 ± 0.5 | 0.03 |
| Viable myocardium (LGE-CMR), n (%) | 19 (39.5%) | 31 (59.6%) | <0.001 |
SAQ Seattle angina questionnaire; CAD: coronary artery disease; LVEF: left ventricular ejection fraction; WMSI: wall motion score index; CMR: cardiovascular magnetic resonance.
Bold values indicate p < 0.05.
Baseline characteristics between Q waves with viable LV & Q waves with non-viable LV groups.
| Q waves with viable LV (n = 19) | Q waves with Non-viable LV (n = 29) | p- value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years), Mean ± SD | 58.3 ± 7.2 | 56.7 ± 6.9 | 0.42 |
| Male Gender, n (%) | 14 (73.6%) | 22 (75.8%) | 0.91 |
| Diabetes mellitus, n (%) | 8 (42.1%) | 13 (44.8%) | 0.84 |
| Hypertension, n (%) | 12 (63.1%) | 20 (68.9%) | 0.77 |
| Dyslipidemia, n (%) | 10 (52.6%) | 17 (58.6%) | 0.32 |
| Current smoking, n (%) | 12 (63.1%) | 17 (58.6%) | 0.45 |
| Family history of premature CAD, n (%) | 4 (21.1%) | 6 (20.7%) | 0.88 |
| SAQ (Total score), (Mean ± SD) | 37.2 ± 10.1 | 52.7 ± 13.2 | 0.02 |
| CCS (3 or 4), n (%) | 14 (73.6%) | 2 (6.8%) | <0.001 |
| CHF, n (%) | 7 (36.8%) | 20 (68.9%) | 0.01 |
| CMR measurements (Mean ± SD) | |||
| LVEF % | 46.3 ± 10.1 | 41.7 ± 9.8 | 0.008 |
| WMSI | 1.5 ± 0.4 | 1.8 ± 0.2 | 0.02 |
| Angiographic Data | |||
| Site of CTO, n (%) | |||
| LAD | 14 (73.7%) | 16 (55.2%) | 0.12 |
| LCX | 3 (15.7%) | 7 (24.1%) | |
| RCA | 2 (10.5%) | 6 (20.7%) | |
| Rentrop grade | |||
| grade 0, n (%) | 2 (10.5%) | 13 (44.8%) | <0.001 |
| grade 1, n (%) | 4 (21.1%) | 9 (31.03%) | |
| grade 2, n (%) | 6 (31.5%) | 3 (10.3%) | |
| grade 3, n (%) | 7 (36.8%) | 4 (13.7%) |
CAD: coronary artery disease; SAQ Seattle angina questionnaire; CCS: Canadian Cardiovascular Society; CHF: congestive heart failure; CHF congestive heart failure. CMR: cardiovascular magnetic resonance; CTO: chronic total occlusion; LAD: left anterior descending; LCX; left circumflex; LVEF: left ventricular ejection fraction; PCI: percutaneous coronary intervention; RCA: right coronary artery; WMSI: wall motion score index.
Bold values indicate p < 0.05.
Comparison between patients with good functional recovery post CTO-PCI versus those with poor functional recovery.
| Good Functional Recovery (n = 34) | Poor Functional Recovery (n = 16) | p- value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years), Mean± SD | 56 ±7 | 57 ± 9 | 0.783 |
| Male Gender, n (%) | 32 (94.1%) | 15 (93.8%) | 0.959 |
| Diabetes mellitus, n (%) | 17 (50%) | 6 (37.5%) | 0.408 |
| Hypertension, n (%) | 22 (64.7%) | 7 (43.8%) | 0.161 |
| Dyslipidemia, n (%) | 15 (44.1%) | 10 (62.5%) | 0.225 |
| Current smoking, n (%) | 24 (70.6%) | 12 (75%) | 0.746 |
| Family history, n (%) | 9 (26.5%) | 1 (6.3%) | 0.095 |
| SAQ (at follow up) Mean ±SD | 90 ± 4.4 | 88 ± 3.8 | 0.417 |
| Pathological Q, n (%) | 15 (44.1%) | 4 (25%) | 0.194 |
| Type of CTO vessel, n (%) | |||
| LAD | 20 (58.8%) | 16 (100%) | |
| LCX | 7 (20.6%) | 0 (0%) | |
| RCA | 7 (20.6%) | 0 (0%) | 0.01 |
| Collateral grade, | |||
| Grade 0, n (%) | 1 (2.9%) | 5 (31.3%) | 0.001 |
| Grade 1, n (%) | 2 (5.9%) | 6 (37.5%) | |
| Grade 2, n (%) | 14 (41.2%) | 1 (6.3%) | |
| Grade 3, n (%) | 17 (50%) | 4 (25%) | |
| Collateral state | |||
| Well-developed, n (%) | 31 (91.2%) | 5 (31.3%) | 0.001 |
| Poor, n (%) | 3 (8.8%) | 11 (68.8%) | |
| Viability score | |||
| Score 1, n (%) | 12 (35.2%) | 4 (25%) | 0.056 |
| Score 2, n (%) | 11 (32.4%) | 4 (25%) | |
| Score 3, n (%) | 11 (32.4%) | 8 (50%) |
SAQ Seattle angina questionnaire, LAD left anterior descending artery, LCX left circumflex artery, RCA right coronary artery, CTO chronic total occlusion, well developed collaterals refer to Rentrop grade.
Bold values indicate p < 0.05.
Comparison between before and after CTO-PCI in patients with Q waves and viability.
| Q waves with viable LV | Q waves with viable LV | p-value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| SAQ | |||
| Total score | 37.2 ± 10.1 | 87.3 ± 12.2 | <0.001 |
| physical Limitation | 58.3 ± 13.7 | 90.2 ± 13.7 | <0.001 |
| Treatment satisfaction | 52.4 ± 7.8 | 88.9 ± 11.3 | <0.001 |
| Angina stability | 32.9 ± 5.9 | 79.3 ± 8.3 | <0.001 |
| Angina frequency | 39.2 ± 7.1 | 80.2 ± 7.9 | <0.001 |
| Disease Perception | 35.2 ± 6.4 | 87.4 ± 9.3 | <0.001 |
| CMR | |||
| LVEF % | 46.3 ± 10.1 | 52.3 ± 6.3 | 0.002 |
| WMSI | 1.5 ± 0.4 | 1.2 ± 0.2 | 0.01 |
SAQ Seattle angina questionnaire, EF ejection fraction, WMSI wall motion score index, CMR cardiac magnetic resonance, CTO chronic total occlusion.
Bold values indicate p < 0.05.
Binary logistic regression analysis to determine predictors of improvement of LV systolic function after single CTO-PCI.
| Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| |||
| OR (95% CI) | P | OR (95% CI) | P | |
| Diabetes Mellitus | 1.6 (0.4–56) | 0.41 | – | – |
| Pathological Q | 2.3 (0.6–8.8) | 0.21 | – | – |
| LVEF% (CMR) | 5.2 (0.5–43.2) | 0.005 | – | – |
| WMSI (CMR) | 0.3 (0.1–1.8) | 0.25 | – | – |
| Well-developed Collaterals | 22.7 (4.6–111.2) | 0.0001 | 41.5 (51–336.3) | 0.0001 |
LVEF left ventricle ejection fraction, WMSI wall motion score index, CMR cardiac magnetic resonance, well developed collaterals refer to Rentrop grade 2 or 3.
Bold values indicate p < 0.05.
Binary logistic regression analysis to determine predictors of improvement of HRQOL after single vessel CTO-PCI.
| Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| |||
| OR (95% CI) | P | OR (95% CI) | P | |
| Diabetes Mellitus | 0.82 (0.17–0.89) | 0.03 | 0.41 (0.11–2.1) | 0.08 |
| Hypertension | 0.63 (0.18–0.97) | 0.041 | 0.19 (0.01–1.92) | 0.12 |
| CCS (before PCI) | 0.16 (0.03–0.51) | 0.004 | 0.39 (1.21–20.8) | 0.01 |
| CHF (before PCI) | 1.06 (1.02–1.30) | 0.003 | 0.32 (0.11–2.39) | 0.32 |
| Pathological Q wave | 6.22 (1.28–33.17) | <0.001 | 7.83 (1.62–18.91) | 0.003 |
| LVEF% (CMR) (after PCI) | 0.87 (0.29–1.33) | 0.03 | 7.29 (1.23–18.22) | 0.06 |
| Well-developed Collaterals | 6.52 (2.11–28.22) | 0.001 | 8.3 (2.21–26.33) | <0.001 |
CCS Canadian cardiovascular score, CHF congestive heart failure, LVEF left ventricle ejection fraction, PCI percutaneous coronary intervention, CMR cardiac magnetic resonance, well developed collaterals refer to Rentrop grade 2 or 3.
Bold values indicate p < 0.05.