CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

推荐文献

科研文章

荐读文献

Level of Scientific Evidence Underlying the Current American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Clinical Practice Guidelines Current Perspectives on Coronavirus Disease 2019 and Cardiovascular Disease: A White Paper by the JAHA Editors The Year in Cardiovascular Medicine 2020: Coronary Intervention Timing and Causes of Unplanned Readmissions After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Insights From the Nationwide Readmission Database Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Interventional Cardiology: From Decision-Making Aid to Advanced Interventional Procedure Assistance Rare Genetic Variants Associated With Sudden Cardiac Death in Adults Safety and feasibility of robotic percutaneous coronary intervention: PRECISE (Percutaneous Robotically-Enhanced Coronary Intervention) Study Influence of LDL-Cholesterol Lowering on Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus Undergoing Coronary Revascularization Impact of Statins on Cardiovascular Outcomes Following Coronary Artery Calcium Scoring Utilization and programming of an automatic MRI recognition feature for cardiac rhythm management devices

Clinical TrialOctober 2017; Vol 120, Issue 8, P1285–1292

JOURNAL:Am J Cardiol. Article Link

Incidence, Treatment, and Outcomes of Coronary Perforation During Chronic Total Occlusion Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Danek BA, Karatasakis A, Brilakis ES et al. Keywords: Coronary Perforation; Chronic Total Occlusion; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

ABSTRACT

Coronary perforation is a potential complication of chronic total occlusion (CTO) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We analyzed 2,097 CTO PCIs performed in 2,049 patients from 2012 to 2017. Patient age was 65 ± 10 years, 85% were men, and 36% had prior coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Technical and procedural success were 88% and 87%, respectively. A major periprocedural adverse cardiovascular event occurred in 2.6%. Coronary perforation occurred in 85 patients (4.1%); The frequency of Ellis class 1, 2, and 3 perforations was 21%, 26%, and 52%, respectively. Perforation occurred more frequently in older patients and those with previous coronary artery bypass graft surgery (61% vs 35%, p < 0.001). Cases with perforation were angiographically more complex (Multicenter CTO Registry in Japan score 3.0 ± 1.2 vs 2.5 ± 1.3, p < 0.001). Twelve patients (14%) with perforation experienced tamponade requiring pericardiocentesis. Patient age, previous PCI, right coronary artery target CTO, blunt or no stump, use of antegrade dissection re-entry, and the retrograde approach were associated with perforation. Adjusted odds ratio for periprocedural major periprocedural adverse cardiovascular events among patients with perforation was 15.04 (95% confidence interval 7.35 to 30.18). In conclusion, perforation occurs relatively infrequently in contemporary CTO PCI performed by experienced operators and is associated with baseline patient characteristics and angiographic complexity necessitating use of advanced crossing techniques. In most cases, perforations do not result in tamponade requiring pericardiocentesis, but they are associated with reduced technical and procedural success, higher periprocedural major adverse events, and reduced procedural efficiency.