CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Other Relevant Articles

Abstract

Recommended Article

Association of preoperative glucose concentration with myocardial injury and death after non-cardiac surgery (GlucoVISION): a prospective cohort study Microthrombi As A Major Cause of Cardiac Injury in COVID-19: A Pathologic Study Sudden Cardiac Arrest Survivorship: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association Use of High-Risk Coronary Atherosclerotic Plaque Detection for Risk Stratification of Patients With Stable Chest Pain: A Secondary Analysis of the PROMISE Randomized Clinical Trial Association between urinary dickkopf-3, acute kidney injury, and subsequent loss of kidney function in patients undergoing cardiac surgery: an observational cohort study Coronary Angiography after Cardiac Arrest — The Right Timing or the Right Patients? A prospective natural-history study of coronary atherosclerosis 2018 ACC Expert Consensus Decision Pathway on Novel Therapies for Cardiovascular Risk Reduction in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes and Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease A Report of the American College of Cardiology Task Force on Expert Consensus Decision Pathways

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.