CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Other Relevant Articles

Abstract

Recommended Article

Comparison of Heart Team vs Interventional Cardiologist Recommendations for the Treatment of Patients With Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease Association of Coronary Anatomical Complexity With Clinical Outcomes After Percutaneous or Surgical Revascularization in the Veterans Affairs Clinical Assessment Reporting and Tracking Program Patient Characteristics Associated With Antianginal Medication Escalation and De-Escalation Following Chronic Total Occlusion Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Insights From the OPEN CTO Registry 2-Year Outcomes After Stenting of Lipid-Rich and Nonrich Coronary Plaques The Elusive Late Benefit of Biodegradable Polymer Drug-Eluting Stents Association of CYP2C19 Loss-of-Function Alleles with Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events of Clopidogrel in Stable Coronary Artery Disease Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Meta-analysis Disrupting Fellow Education Through Group Texting: WhatsApp in Fellow Education? Treatment of higher-risk patients with an indication for revascularization: evolution within the field of contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention
|<<... 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 >>|

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.


>CBS CBS 2019

> CBS 2019 REGISTRATION

> CBS 2019 PROGRAM

> CBS 2019 CALL FOR SCIENCE

> CBS 2019 SPOTLIGHTS

 CBSMD

> CBSMD WEBSITE REGISTRATION

> EDUCATION CENTER

> RECOMMANDED PAPER

> TOP 10 RESEARCH PAPER

> PRE-READING

CBS 2019 CBS 2019 FACULTY Education Resource CBSMD Scientific Library
Copyright ⓒ CBS MD Nanjing China. All rights reserved. 京ICP备16025898号-11
联系我们| Top