CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

科学研究

Abstract

Recommended Article

Canagliflozin and Cardiovascular and Renal Events in Type 2 Diabetes Outcomes with intravascular ultrasound-guided stent implantation: a meta-analysis of randomized trials in the era of drug-eluting stents Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy and Ventricular Tachyarrhythmia Burden Impact of intravascular ultrasound-guided percutaneous coronary intervention on long-term clinical outcomes in a real world population 2019 ACC Expert Consensus Decision Pathway on Risk Assessment, Management, and Clinical Trajectory of Patients Hospitalized With Heart Failure: A Report of the American College of Cardiology Solution Set Oversight Committee Therapeutic Options for In-Stent Restenosis A Randomized Study of Distal Filter Protection Versus Conventional Treatment During Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Attenuated Plaque Identified by Intravascular Ultrasound First-in-man evaluation of intravascular optical frequency domain imaging (OFDI) of Terumo: a comparison with intravascular ultrasound and quantitative coronary angiography

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.