Henry Ford Hospital, 2799 West Grand Blvd (K-2 Cath Lab), Detroit, MI 48202 USA.
J Invasive Cardiol. 2021 Sep;33(9):E670-E676. doi: 10.25270/jic/20.00665.
We sought to examine the procedural and clinical outcomes of patients who underwent chronic total occlusion (CTO) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the setting of acute myocardial infarction (AMI).
We assessed the clinical and procedural characteristics, technical success, procedural success, and in-hospital outcomes of 2314 patients who underwent CTO-PCI at 20 experienced centers between 2012 and 2017, classified according to whether or not they presented with AMI.
Mean patient age was 65 ± 10 years, 85% were men, and 154 (6.7%) presented with AMI (5.5% with non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction, 1.1% with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction). Compared with non-AMI patients who underwent CTO-PCI, AMI patients had higher prevalence of diabetes (56% vs 42%; P<.01) and lower median left ventricular ejection fraction (48% vs 54%; P<.001). The CTO angiographic characteristics were similar between the 2 groups. Compared with non-AMI patients undergoing CTO-PCI, AMI patients had more frequent use of antegrade wire escalation (86.0% vs 78.9%; P=.03) and more frequent use of hemodynamic support devices (16.2% vs 3.4%; P<.01), and were more likely to have a non-CTO lesion treated (34.0% vs 26.6%; P=.03). AMI and non-AMI patients had similar technical success (90% vs 87%; P=.26), procedural success (88% vs 85%; P=.38), and incidence of in-hospital MACE (2.6% vs 2.5%; P=.94).
CTO-PCI is performed infrequently in AMI patients and is associated with similar technical and procedural success rates and in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular event rates when compared with CTO-PCI performed in non-AMI patients.
我们旨在研究在急性心肌梗死(AMI)背景下行慢性完全闭塞(CTO)经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的患者的程序和临床结局。
我们评估了 2012 年至 2017 年间在 20 个有经验的中心接受 CTO-PCI 的 2314 例患者的临床和程序特征、技术成功率、程序成功率和院内结局,并根据其是否存在 AMI 进行分类。
患者平均年龄为 65±10 岁,85%为男性,154 例(6.7%)存在 AMI(5.5%为非 ST 段抬高型心肌梗死,1.1%为 ST 段抬高型心肌梗死)。与接受 CTO-PCI 的非 AMI 患者相比,AMI 患者糖尿病患病率更高(56%比 42%;P<.01),左心室射血分数中位数更低(48%比 54%;P<.001)。两组 CTO 血管造影特征相似。与接受 CTO-PCI 的非 AMI 患者相比,AMI 患者更频繁地使用正向导丝升级(86.0%比 78.9%;P=.03)和更频繁地使用血流动力学支持装置(16.2%比 3.4%;P<.01),更有可能治疗非 CTO 病变(34.0%比 26.6%;P=.03)。AMI 和非 AMI 患者的技术成功率(90%比 87%;P=.26)、程序成功率(88%比 85%;P=.38)和院内主要不良心血管事件发生率(2.6%比 2.5%;P=.94)相似。
与非 AMI 患者接受的 CTO-PCI 相比,AMI 患者行 CTO-PCI 的频率较低,但技术和程序成功率以及院内主要不良心血管事件发生率相似。