Search

Intravascular imaging can facilitate chronic total occlusion (CTO) percutaneous coronary intervention. We examined the frequency of use and outcomes of intravascular imaging among 619 CTO percutaneous coronary interventions performed between 2012 and 2015 at 7 US centers. Mean age was 65.4±10 years and 85% of the patients were men. Intravascular imaging was used in 38%: intravascular ultrasound in 36%, optical coherence tomography in 3%, and both in 1.45%. Intravascular imaging was used for stent sizing (26.3%), stent optimization (38.0%), and CTO crossing (35.7%, antegrade in 27.9%, and retrograde in 7.8%). Intravascular imaging to facilitate crossing was used more frequently in lesions with proximal cap ambiguity (49% versus 26%, P

Objectives: We sought to examine contemporary perspectives and practices on chronic total occlusion (CTO) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)., Background: The frequency and success of CTO-PCI have been increasing in recent years., Methods: An online questionnaire was created and distributed to cardiologists within the United States and internationally., Results: A total of 1149 responses were obtained. The United States (n = 845; 73.5%), Asia (n = 98; 8.5%), Europe (n = 88; 7.7%), South America (n = 42; 3.7%), and Canada (n = 33; 2.9%) accounted for most responses. Mean practice duration of the respondents was 16.4 ± 11.5 years and 66.9% were interventional cardiologists. Most respondents agreed that CTO-PCI results in an improvement of patient symptoms (90.7%), left ventricular function (79.3%), arrhythmia risk (69.2%), and overall survival (63.1%). Interventional cardiologists had a more favorable view of the benefits of CTO-PCI as compared with non-interventional cardiologists (P<.001). Most respondents estimated the procedural success rates of contemporary CTO-PCI to be between 51%-75% (34.2%) and 76%-85% (30.2%), with interventional cardiologists estimating higher success rates than non-interventionalists (P<.001). Perforation, mortality, and tamponade were the three most concerning complications. Time and procedure complexity were reported to be the most significant barriers to the development of a CTO-PCI program., Conclusions: Most cardiologists believe that CTO-PCI can provide significant clinical benefits and can be accomplished with moderate to high success rates. Interventional cardiologists have a more favorable view of CTO-PCI as compared with non-invasive cardiologists.

Background: The American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) and the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) have developed guidelines to assist clinicians in making evidence-based decisions. This study compares the ACC/AHA and ESC guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease (VHD)., Methods: The current ACC/AHA and ESC guidelines for VHD, last updated in 2014 and 2012, respectively, were compared by class of recommendation (COR), level of evidence (LOE), and content., Results: The ACC/AHA and ESC VHD guidelines contain 229 and 85 recommendations, respectively. The COR distributions of the ACC/AHA and ESC VHD guidelines were 47.6% vs 44.7% class I [P=.65]; 46.3% vs 55.3% class II [P=.16]; and 6.1% vs 0.0% class III [P=.01], respectively. The LOE distributions were 3.1% vs 0.0% LOE A [P=.20]; 47.2% vs 10.6% LOE B [P<.001]; and 49.8% vs 89.4% LOE C [P<.001], respectively. The recommendation type distributions were 31.0% vs 2.4% diagnostic [P<.001]; 23.1% vs 16.5% medical therapy [P=.20]; and 45.9% vs 81.2% interventional/surgical recommendations [P<.001], respectively. The content of the guidelines was similar, with only minor differences in a few recommendations., Conclusions: The ACC/AHA VHD guidelines contain significantly more recommendations. The distribution of COR was similar, but the ACC/AHA guidelines included more LOE B recommendations and fewer LOE C recommendations, suggesting that the ACC/AHA guidelines place greater emphasis on published data than expert opinion. Overall, the ACC/AHA and ESC guidelines provide similar recommendations, suggesting consistency in practice; however, the relative paucity of LOE A recommendations highlights the need for additional research.

Introduction: We examined the impact of proximal vessel tortuosity on the outcomes of chronic total occlusion (CTO) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)., Methods: The baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics and procedural outcomes of 1618 consecutive CTO-PCIs performed between 2012 and 2016 at 14 United States centers in 1589 patients were reviewed., Results: Mean patient age was 65.3 ± 10.0 years and 85% were men. Moderate/severe proximal vessel tortuosity was present in 35.7% of target lesions. Compared with non-tortuous lesions, tortuous lesions had longer length (30 mm [interquartile range, 20-50 mm] vs 28 mm [interquartile range, 16-40 mm]; P<.001), more proximal cap ambiguity (36% vs 28%; P<.01), and more frequent utilization of the retrograde approach (52% vs 37%; P<.001). Moderate/severe proximal vessel tortuosity was associated with lower technical success rates (84.1% vs 91.3%; P<.001) and procedural success rates (82.3% vs 89.9%; P<.001), but similar incidence of major cardiac adverse events (3.0% vs 2.5%; P=.59). Moderate/severe tortuosity was associated with longer procedure time and fluoroscopy time, higher air kerma radiation dose, and larger contrast volume., Conclusion: In a contemporary multicenter registry, moderate/severe proximal vessel tortuosity was present in approximately one-third of target CTO lesions and was associated with more frequent use of the retrograde approach and lower success rates, but similar complication rates.

Objectives: We investigated whether side-branch loss during chronic total occlusion (CTO) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) could adversely impact clinical outcomes., Background: Side-branch occlusion during PCI has been associated with periprocedural myocardial infarction and higher incidence of major adverse cardiac event (MACE), but has received limited study in CTO-PCI., Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records and coronary angiograms for 109 consecutive CTOPCI cases performed at our institution during 2012 and 2013. Post-PCI patency of ≥1 mm diameter side branches and associated clinical outcomes were assessed., Results: Mean age was 65 ± 8 years and 99.1% of the patients were men. The CTO target vessel was the right coronary artery (54%), circumflex (26%), and left anterior descending artery (20%). Side-branch loss occurred in 28 cases (25.7%) due to antegrade dissection/reentry (n = 9), retrograde dissection/reentry (n = 5), stenting over the branch (n = 12), and dissection during antegrade crossing attempts (n = 2). Recanalization of the occluded side branch was pursued in 8 cases (28.6%) and was successful in 4 patients. Patients with side-branch loss had higher post-PCI increase in CK-MB levels (8.4 ng/mL [interquartile range, 2.7-33.5 ng/mL] vs 1.8 ng/mL [interquartile range, 0.025-6.775 ng/mL]; P<.001) and higher 12-month incidence of all-cause death (17.3% vs 2.8%; P=.02) and cardiovascular death (7.4% vs 0.0%; P=.02)., Conclusions: Side-branch loss occurs in approximately 1 in 4 CTO-PCIs and is associated with higher risk for periprocedural myocardial infarction and higher mortality.

Introduction: Google Glass (Google, Inc) is a voice-activated, hands-free, optical head-mounted display device capable of taking pictures, recording videos, and transmitting data via wi-fi. In the present study, we examined the accuracy of coronary angiogram interpretation, recorded using Google Glass., Methods: Google Glass was used to record 15 angiograms with 17 major findings and the participants were asked to interpret those recordings on: (1) an iPad (Apple, Inc); or (2) a desktop computer. Interpretation was compared with the original angiograms viewed on a desktop. Ten physicians (2 interventional cardiologists and 8 cardiology fellows) participated. One point was assigned for each correct finding, for a maximum of 17 points., Results: The mean angiogram interpretation score for Google Glass angiogram recordings viewed on an iPad or a desktop vs the original angiograms viewed on a desktop was 14.9 ± 1.1, 15.2 ± 1.8, and 15.9 ± 1.1, respectively (P=.06 between the iPad and the original angiograms, P=.51 between the iPad and recordings viewed on a desktop, and P=.43 between the recordings viewed on a desktop and the original angiograms). In a post-study survey, one of the 10 physicians (10%) was "neutral" with the quality of the recordings using Google Glass, 6 physicians (60%) were "somewhat satisfied," and 3 physicians (30%) were "very satisfied.", Conclusion: This small pilot study suggests that the quality of coronary angiogram video recordings obtained using Google Glass may be adequate for recognition of major findings, supporting its expanding use in telemedicine.