4.6 Article

Procedural and In-Hospital Outcomes After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Chronic Total Occlusions of Coronary Arteries 2002 to 2008 Impact of Novel Guidewire Techniques

期刊

JACC-CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS
卷 2, 期 6, 页码 489-497

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2009.04.008

关键词

chronic total occlusion; percutaneous coronary intervention; in-hospital major adverse cardiac events; procedural success; controlled antegrade and retrograde tracking

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of this study was to examine the procedural success and in-hospital outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for chronic total occlusions in the current era during contemporary practice. The technique of PCI has improved over time with the introduction of novel equipment and guidewire crossing techniques. However, there is limited data available from contemporary practice in the recent years. We evaluated the procedural and in-hospital outcomes in a consecutive series of 904 procedures performed at Toyohashi Heart Center for PCI of chronic total occlusions of >3 months in duration. Technical and procedural success was achieved in 87.5% and 86.2%, respectively. In-hospital major adverse cardiac events occurred in only 1.9% of the patients. Single antegrade wire was the predominant strategy for guidewire crossing; however, retrograde guidewire crossing was used in 7.2% of the cases and controlled antegrade and retrograde subintimal tracking in 9.9% of the cases as the final strategy. Logistic regression analysis identified severe tortuosity and moderate-to-severe calcification as significant predictors of procedural failure. This is the first reported large series of patients undergoing PCI for chronic total occlusion with improved wire crossing techniques. We have reported high success rates in recent years and very low complication rates despite the use of more aggressive devices and techniques. (J Am Coll Cardiol Intv 2009;2:489-97) (c) 2009 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据