CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Scientific Library

Abstract

Recommended Article

Management of two major complications in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory: the no-reflow phenomenon and coronary perforations Symptom-Onset-To-Balloon Time, ST-Segment Resolution and In-Hospital Mortality in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in China: From China Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry Effect of alirocumab on major adverse cardiovascular events according to renal function in patients with a recent acute coronary syndrome: prespecified analysis from the ODYSSEY OUTCOMES randomized clinical trial Effect of Pre-Hospital Crushed Prasugrel Tablets in Patients with STEMI Planned for Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: The Randomized COMPARE CRUSH Trial Treating Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease in ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Why, How, and When? Treatment effects of systematic two-stent and provisional stenting techniques in patients with complex coronary bifurcation lesions: rationale and design of a prospective, randomised and multicentre DEFINITION II trial Percutaneous coronary intervention reduces mortality in myocardial infarction patients with comorbidities: Implications for elderly patients with diabetes or kidney disease Long-Term Coronary Functional Assessment of the Infarct-Related Artery Treated With Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Scaffolds or Everolimus-Eluting Metallic Stents: Insights of the TROFI II Trial

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.