Antegrade versus Retrograde Approach for Recanalization of Ostial or Stumpless Coronary Chronic Total Occlusion.

Xi Wu, Mingxing Wu, Haobo Huang, Zhe Liu, Jie Cai, Qizhou Zhang, He Huang
Author Information
  1. Xi Wu: Department of Cardiology, Xiangtan Central Hospital, Xiangtan, Hunan, 411100, People's Republic of China.
  2. Mingxing Wu: Department of Cardiology, Xiangtan Central Hospital, Xiangtan, Hunan, 411100, People's Republic of China.
  3. Haobo Huang: Department of Cardiology, Xiangtan Central Hospital, Xiangtan, Hunan, 411100, People's Republic of China.
  4. Zhe Liu: Department of Cardiology, Xiangtan Central Hospital, Xiangtan, Hunan, 411100, People's Republic of China.
  5. Jie Cai: Department of Cardiology, Xiangtan Central Hospital, Xiangtan, Hunan, 411100, People's Republic of China.
  6. Qizhou Zhang: Department of Cardiology, Xiangtan Central Hospital, Xiangtan, Hunan, 411100, People's Republic of China.
  7. He Huang: Department of Cardiology, Xiangtan Central Hospital, Xiangtan, Hunan, 411100, People's Republic of China.

Abstract

Purpose: This research aimed to evaluate the procedural and in-hospital clinical outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ostial or stumpless chronic total occlusion (CTO) utilizing both the antegrade-only and retrograde approaches.
Methods: A comprehensive retrospective examination was conducted on the procedural and in-hospital clinical outcomes of 89 consecutive patients subjected to ostial or stumpless CTO PCI at our institution between April 2015 and October 2022.
Results: The antegrade-only technique demonstrated a superior technical success rate (92.0% vs 71.9%, p = 0.041) and procedural success rate (92.0% vs 68.8%, p = 0.022) in comparison to the retrograde approach (RA). The RA group presented a notably elevated Japanese-CTO (J-CTO) score relative to the antegrade-only approach group (2.45±0.73 vs 1.64±0.70, p < 0.001). The antegrade-only approach group manifested an increased frequency of microchannels at the proximal stump relative to the RA group (56.0% vs 10.9%, p < 0.001). In-hospital major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and in-hospital myocardial infarction (MI) were observed more prevalently in the RA group (18.8% vs 0, p = 0.003; 15.6% vs 0, p = 0.008; respectively). A J-CTO score below 2 and the manifestation of microchannels at the proximal stump were identified as predictors for successful antegrade-only approach PCI for ostial or stumpless CTO (OR: 2.79 [95% CI: 1.92-5.03, P =0.003]; OR: 2.89 [95% CI: 1.32-6.03, P =0.001]; respectively).
Conclusion: Relative to RA PCI for ostial or stumpless CTO, the antegrade-only approach is utilized for less complex CTO lesions and is associated with a diminished probability of in-hospital MACE.

Keywords

References

  1. J Interv Cardiol. 2018 Oct;31(5):562-571 [PMID: 29974508]
  2. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2011 Sep;4(9):941-51 [PMID: 21939933]
  3. EuroIntervention. 2015 Apr;10(12):1409-17 [PMID: 25912391]
  4. EuroIntervention. 2012 May 15;8(1):139-45 [PMID: 22580257]
  5. Heart Lung Circ. 2020 Jun;29(6):894-903 [PMID: 31320259]
  6. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022 May 09;9:895457 [PMID: 35615565]
  7. Int J Cardiol. 2011 Apr 14;148(2):174-8 [PMID: 19942305]
  8. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2017 Jun;33(6):807-813 [PMID: 28197870]
  9. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2021 May 1;97(6):1162-1173 [PMID: 32876381]
  10. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016 Jan 11;9(1):1-9 [PMID: 26762904]
  11. Heart. 2013 Apr;99(7):474-9 [PMID: 23376946]
  12. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2020 Nov;96(5):1037-1043 [PMID: 31778041]
  13. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2022 Jul 25;15(14):1413-1422 [PMID: 35863789]
  14. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2018 Jul 23;11(14):1325-1335 [PMID: 29706508]
  15. Cardiol Clin. 2010 Feb;28(1):71-9 [PMID: 19962050]
  16. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1997 Apr;29(5):955-63 [PMID: 9120181]
  17. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2017 Nov 13;10(21):2144-2154 [PMID: 29055764]
  18. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2005 Oct;66(2):217-36 [PMID: 16155889]
  19. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2017 Nov 13;10(21):2158-2170 [PMID: 29055762]
  20. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1993 Mar 1;21(3):604-11 [PMID: 8436741]
  21. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015 Jun 9;65(22):2388-400 [PMID: 26046732]
  22. Eur Heart J. 2018 Jul 7;39(26):2484-2493 [PMID: 29722796]
  23. Rev Esp Cardiol (Engl Ed). 2019 May;72(5):373-382 [PMID: 29954721]
  24. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016 Nov 14;9(21):2232-2239 [PMID: 27744039]
  25. EuroIntervention. 2019 Jul 20;15(4):e354-e361 [PMID: 30375334]
  26. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2011 Feb;4(2):213-21 [PMID: 21349461]
  27. Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2018 Apr;19(3 Pt A):292-297 [PMID: 29174825]
  28. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2008 Jan 1;71(1):8-19 [PMID: 17985379]
  29. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2007 Jul 1;70(1):15-20 [PMID: 17580364]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.00antegrade-onlyvspCTOapproachRAgroupin-hospitalPCIostialstumpless=2procedural0%1clinicaloutcomespercutaneouscoronaryinterventionchronictotalocclusionretrograde89successrate929%8%J-CTOscorerelative<001microchannelsproximalstumpMACErespectivelyOR:[95%CI:03P=0Purpose:researchaimedevaluateutilizingapproachesMethods:comprehensiveretrospectiveexaminationconductedconsecutivepatientssubjectedinstitutionApril2015October2022Results:techniquedemonstratedsuperiortechnical7104168022comparisonpresentednotablyelevatedJapanese-CTO45±07364±070manifestedincreasedfrequency5610In-hospitalmajoradversecardiaceventsmyocardialinfarctionMIobservedprevalently18003156%008manifestationidentifiedpredictorssuccessful7992-5003]32-6001]Conclusion:RelativeutilizedlesscomplexlesionsassociateddiminishedprobabilityAntegradeversusRetrogradeApproachRecanalizationOstialStumplessCoronaryChronicTotalOcclusionintravascularultrasound

Similar Articles

Cited By