Impact of occlusion duration on the success rate and outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention in chronic total occlusions

ABSTRACTBackgroundInitial studies have shown that old occlusions or those with indeterminate occlusion duration have been associated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) failure and a worse prognosis. This study aimed to determine the impact of occlusion duration on the success and outcomes of contemporary PCI on chronic total occlusion (CTO).MethodsThe authors analyzed a retrospective cohort of consecutive patients submitted to PCI in CTO, who were compared according to the confirmed occlusion duration (COD) < 12 months, ≥ 12 months, or indeterminate occlusion duration (IOD).ResultsA total of 168 patients were treated, 122 (72.6%) with COD (80 < 12 months, 42 ≥ 12 months) and 46 (24.7%) with an IOD. Lesion extension was 17.0 ± 13.6mm, in 2.90 ± 0.58mm vessels, and the anterograde approach was used in 98.8% of cases. Angiographic success was attained in 79.2% of patients (80.0% vs. 73.8% vs. 82.6%; p = 0.73). The main cause of failure was the inability to cross the lesion with the guidewire (68.6%). Occlusion duration had no impact on in-hospital events (4.8% vs. 7.1% vs. 6.0%; p = 0.73), which were almost entirely explained by periprocedural myocardial infarction, or on late outcomes (18.8% vs. 7.1% vs. 15.3%; p = 0.23). At the multivariate analysis, lesion length ≥ 20mm (odds ratio - OR = 7.27; 95% confidence interval - 95% IC 1.94-29.1; p = 0.003), calcification (OR = 4.72; 95% CI 1.19-19.1; p = 0.02), and tortuosity of the occluded segment (OR = 15.98; 95% CI 2.18-144.7; p = 0.007) were predictors of failure.ConclusionsOcclusion duration was not associated with increased failure rate of the procedure or worse PCI outcomes in CTO

Impact of Side Branch Predilation on Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Complex Coronary Bifurcation Lesions

ABSTRACTBackgroundThe treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions with single stenting in the main vessel and provisional side branch stenting may be limited by the degree of anatomical/morphological complexity. Side branch predilation, a procedural step that is typically avoided, may be required to maintain side branch patency. The impact of side branch predilation on the immediate results of percutaneous coronary intervention in complex coronary bifurcation lesions was investigated.MethodsBetween May, 2008 and August, 2009, 59 patients with single coronary bifurcation lesions and significant involvement of the main and side branches were included in the study. The main exclusion criteria were the involvement of the left main coronary artery, ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction (< 72 hours) and in-stent restenosis.ResultsThe mean age of patients was 61.2±11 years, 25.4% were female, and 30.1% had diabetes mellitus. Lesions were most prevalent in the left anterior descending artery/diagonal branch (86.4%). During the procedure, 8.5% (5/59) of lesions had unsuccessful side branch predilation, and four of these bifurcations were treated with two stents. In the multivariate model, side branch stenosis at baseline was the only significant predictor of unsuccessful side branch predilation (odds ratio 1.15, 95%CI: 1.01–1.30; P=0.04), and side branch stenosis > 87.6% was identified as the most accurate cut-off value to predict failure in the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.ConclusionsSide branch predilation was associated with immediate side branch failure in < 10% of cases, and the only significant predictor in the multivariate model was side branch stenosis severity (> 85%) at baseline

Implante transcateter valve‐in‐valve para disfunção de biopróteses cirúrgicas aórticas

RESUMOIntroduçãoEstudos recentes têm demonstrado a eficácia do implante transcateter valve‐in‐valve para o tratamento de disfunção de biopróteses em pacientes de alto risco cirúrgico. Apresentamos nossa experiência inicial com o implante valve‐in‐valve.MétodosCaracterizamos o perfil clínico, ecocardiográfico e do procedimento, e reportamos os resultados de médio prazo de pacientes com disfunção de bioprótese submetidos a implante valve‐in‐valve em posição aórtica.ResultadosIncluímos sete pacientes do sexo masculino, com idade de 72,6 ± 10,0 anos. O escore STS foi 9,6 ± 10,5%, e o EuroSCORE logístico foi 22,7 ± 14,7%. Três pacientes apresentavam dupla disfunção; dois tinham insuficiência; e dois exibiam estenose isolada. A via transfemoral foi utilizada em seis casos, e a transapical, em um caso. Os dispositivos implantados incluíram as próteses Sapien XT (n = 5) e CoreValve (n = 2). O sucesso do procedimento foi obtido em seis (85,7%) casos. Após o procedimento, o gradiente médio reduziu‐se de 38,2 ± 9,6mmHg para 20,9 ± 5,9mmHg, e a área valvar elevou‐se de 1,2 ± 0,4cm2 para 1,5 ± 0,5cm2. Ao final de 1 ano, não ocorreram óbitos e nem outros desfechos adversos significativos; 80% dos pacientes encontravam‐se em classe funcional NYHA I/II. Os gradientes transvalvares e a área valvar permaneceram inalterados nesse período.ConclusõesO procedimento valve‐in‐valve foi eficaz na maioria dos pacientes de alto risco cirúrgico com disfunção de bioprótese. Quando realizado em pacientes bem selecionados, resulta em desfechos clínicos e hemodinâmicos satisfatórios.ABSTRACTBackgroundRecent studies have demonstrated the efficacy of the transcatheter valve‐in‐valve implantation for the treatment of bioprosthesis dysfunction in high‐risk surgical patients. This study presents the initial experience with valve‐in‐valve implantation.MethodsClinical, echocardiographic, and procedural profiles were characterized, and the mid‐term results of patients with surgical bioprosthesis dysfunction submitted to valve‐in‐valve implantation in the aortic position were reported.ResultsSeven male patients were included, aged 72.6 ± 10.0 years. The STS score was 9,6 ± 10,5%, and the logistic EuroSCORE was 22.7 ± 14.7%. Three patients had combined aortic bioprosthesis failure; two had isolated regurgitation; and two had isolated stenosis. The transfemoral access was used in six cases, and the transapical access in one case. Implanted devices included Sapien XT (n = 5) and CoreValve (n = 2) prostheses. Procedural success was achieved in six (85.7%) cases. After the procedure, the mean gradient decreased from 38.2 ± 9.6mmHg to 20.9 ± 5.9mmHg, and the valve area increased from 1.2 ± 0.4cm2 to 1.5 ± 0.5cm2. After 1 year, there were no deaths and no other significant adverse outcomes; 80% of patients were in NYHA functional class I/II. The transvalvular gradients and valve area remained unchanged in this period.ConclusionsThe valve‐in‐valve procedure was effective in most high‐risk surgical patients with bioprosthesis dysfunction. When performed in well‐selected patients, it results in satisfactory clinical and hemodynamic outcomes