CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Other Relevant Articles

Abstract

Recommended Article

Coronary Catheterization and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in China: 10-Year Results From the China PEACE-Retrospective CathPCI Study Impact of Oxidative Stress on the Heart and Vasculature: Part 2 of a 3-Part Series The Aging Cardiovascular System: Understanding It at the Cellular and Clinical Levels Screening for Cardiovascular Disease Risk With Electrocardiography: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement Critical Appraisal of Contemporary Clinical Endpoint Definitions in Coronary Intervention Trials: A Guidance Document Relation of prior statin and anti-hypertensive use to severity of disease among patients hospitalized with COVID-19: Findings from the American Heart Association’s COVID-19 Cardiovascular Disease Registry Comparison of a Novel Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stent With a Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stent 5-Year Outcomes of the Randomized BIOFLOW-II Trial Optimal medical therapy improves clinical outcomes in patients undergoing revascularization with percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting: insights from the Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with TAXUS and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) trial at the 5-year follow-up

Original Research2008 Aug;4(2):181-3.

JOURNAL:EuroIntervention. Article Link

Management of two major complications in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory: the no-reflow phenomenon and coronary perforations

Muller O, Windecker S, Cuisset T et al. Keywords: complication; no-reflow phenomenon; coronary perforation

ABSTRACT


The no-reflow phenomenon has been defined in 2001 by Eeckhout and Kern as inadequate myocardial perfusion through a given segment of the coronary circulation without angiographic evidence of mechanical vessel obstruction1. Rates of cardiac death and non-fatal cardiac events are increased in patients with compared to those without no-reflow2,3. The term “no reflow” encompasses the slow-flow, slow-reflow, no-flow and low-flow phenomenon. Its incidence depends on the clinical setting, ranging from as low as 2% in elective native coronary percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) to 20% in saphenous venous graft (SVG) PCI and up to 26% in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) mechanical reperfusion4-6. Depending on the clinical setting, the mechanism of the no-reflow phenomenon differs. Distal embolisation and ischaemic-reperfusion cell injury prevail in patients with AMI, microvascular spasm and embolisation of aggregated platelets occur in native coronary PCI, whereas embolisation of degenerated plaque elements, including thrombotic and atherosclerotic debris are encountered during SVG PCI7. The no-reflow phenomenon is classified according to its pathophysiology with potential implications for its treatment in the categories provided in Table 1.