CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Stenting Left Main

Abstract

Recommended Article

Complex PCI procedures: challenges for the interventional cardiologist EXCELling in Left Main Intervention Long-term outcomes following mini-crush versus culotte stenting for the treatment of unprotected left main disease: insights from the Milan and New-Tokyo (MITO) registry Operator Experience and Outcomes After Left Main Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Long-term safety and effectiveness of unprotected left main coronary stenting with drug-eluting stents compared with bare-metal stents Left Main Revascularization in 2017: Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting or Percutaneous Coronary Intervention? Mortality after coronary artery bypass grafting versus percutaneous coronary intervention with stenting for coronary artery disease: a pooled analysis of individual patient data Clinical and angiographic outcomes of patients treated with everolimus-eluting stents or first-generation Paclitaxel-eluting stents for unprotected left main disease
|<<... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ...>>|

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.
>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