COMPLICATIONS OF CHRONIC TOTAL OCCLUSION PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY INTERVENTION
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of chronic total occlusion (CTO) lesions
continues to be a challenge, with a lower success rate and a higher risk of procedure-related
complications than intervention on non-chronic total occlusion lesions. Due to a paucity of data on
this phenomena in Vietnam, we undertook this study to learn more about the complications associated
with this complicated technique.
Objectives: Determining the rate and factors associated with procedural complications of CTO-PCI.
Subject – Method of Study: Observational study on eligible patients undergone percutaneous
coronary intervention for CTO lesions at the Ho Chi Minh City University Medical Center, Vietnam,
from April 2017 to June 2019.
Results: There were 194 CTO patients undergone percutaneous coronary intervention that were
enrolled in this study. The mean age was 67.3±11.3, in which male accounted for 73.7%. Comorbidities were hypertension (82.5%), old myocardial infarction (26.3%), previous PCI (26.3%),
diabetes mellitus (29.9%), chronic kidney disease (9.8%). There were 77.4% patients hospitalized
for acute coronary syndrome. Mean SYNTAX I score was 21.7±7.2, mean J-CTO score was 2.4±1.1.
Antegrade intervention strategy accounted for 83.0%, with LAD being the most intervened lesion
(55.7%). The overall success rate of the procedure was 87.1%. In-hospital procedural complications
noted in 16 cases (8.2%), included: coronary artery perforation (2.1%), coronary artery dissection
(1.5%), side-branch loss (1.0%), thrombosis (1.0%), procedure-related myocardial infarction (0.5%),
arrhythmia (1.5%), bleeding (0.5%). Factors related to procedural complications included: old age,
previous PCI.
Conclusion: Our study showed a low rate of CTO-PCI related procedural complications (8.2%).
Factors related to high complication risk were old age and previous PCI
Article Details
Keywords
Complications, pertacuneous coronary intervention, chronic total occlusion, antegrade, retrograde.
References
“Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty
of chronic total occlusions. Determinants of
primary success and long‐term clinical outcome”.
Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions,
2000, 49 (3), 258-264.
[2] George S, Cockburn J, Clayton TC et al., “Longterm follow-up of elective chronic total coronary
occlusion angioplasty: analysis from the UK
Central Cardiac Audit Database”. Journal of the
American College of Cardiology, 2014, 64 (3),
235-243.
[3] Brilakis ES, Banerjee S, Karmpaliotis D et al.,
“Procedural outcomes of chronic total occlusion
percutaneous coronary intervention: a report
from the NCDR (National Cardiovascular Data
Registry)”. JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions,
2015, 8 (2), 245-253.
[4] Danek BA, Karatasakis A, Karmpaliotis D et al.,
“Development and Validation of a Scoring System
for Predicting Periprocedural Complications
During Percutaneous Coronary Interventions
of Chronic Total Occlusions: The Prospective
Global Registry for the Study of Chronic Total
Occlusion Intervention (PROGRESS CTO)
Complications Score”. Journal of the American
Heart Association, 2016, 5 (10), e004272.
[5] Sapontis J, Salisbury AC, Yeh RW et al., “Early
procedural and health status outcomes after
chronic total occlusion angioplasty: a report
from the OPEN-CTO Registry (Outcomes,
Patient Health Status, and Efficiency in Chronic
Total Occlusion Hybrid Procedures)”. JACC:
Cardiovascular Interventions, 2017, 10 (15),
1523-1534.
[6] Galassi AR, Boukhris M, Toma A et al.,
“Percutaneous coronary intervention of chronic
totalocclusionsinpatientswithlowleftventricular
ejection fraction”. JACC: Cardiovascular
Interventions, 2017, 10 (21), 2158-2170.
[7] Rigger J, Hanratty CG, Walsh SJ, “Common and
uncommon CTO complications”. Interventional
Cardiology Review, 2018, 13 (3), 121.
[8] Riley RF, Sapontis J, Kirtane AJ et al.,
“Prevalence, predictors, and health status
implications of periprocedural complications
during coronary chronic total occlusion
angioplasty”. EuroIntervention: journal of
EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working
Group on Interventional Cardiology of the
European Society of Cardiology, 2018, 14 (11),
e1199-e1206.
[9] Konstantinidis NV, Werner GS, Deftereos S et
al., “Temporal trends in chronic Total occlusion
interventions in Europe: 17 626 procedures from
the European registry of chronic Total occlusion”.
Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions, 2018,
11 (10), e006229.
[10] Lee SW, Lee PH, Ahn JM et al., “Randomized trial
evaluating percutaneous coronary intervention
for the treatment of chronic total occlusion: the
DECISION-CTO trial”. Circulation, 2019, 139
(14), 1674-1683.
[11] Vescovo GM, Zivelonghi C, Scott B et al.,
“Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Chronic
Total Occlusion”, 2020.
[12] YbarraLF,RinfretS,BrilakisESetal.,“Definitions
and Clinical Trial Design Principles for Coronary
Artery Chronic Total Occlusion Therapies: CTOARC Consensus Recommendations”. Circulation,
2021, 143 (5), 479-500.
[13] Karacsonyi J, Vemmou E, Nikolakopoulos ID
et al., “Complications of chronic total occlusion
percutaneous coronary intervention”. Neth Heart
J, 2021, 29 (1), 60-67.