1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Prevalence and outcomes of coronary artery perforation during percutaneous coronary intervention

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 18

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Increased coronary perforation in the new device era. Incidence, classification, management, and outcome.

          The incidence of coronary perforation using new percutaneous revascularization techniques may be increased compared with PTCA. Still, perforation is uncommonly reported, and the optimal management and expected outcome remain unknown. The objectives of the study were to determine the incidence of coronary perforation using balloon angioplasty (percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty, PTCA) and new revascularization techniques and to develop optimal strategies for its management based on classification and outcome. Eleven sites with frequent use of new revascularization devices and prospective coding of consecutive procedures for coronary perforation during 1990 to 1991 contributed to a perforation registry. Patients with perforation were matched by device with an equal-sized cohort without perforation. Data were collected centrally, and all procedural cineangiograms were reviewed at a core angiographic laboratory. A classification scheme based on angiographic appearance of the perforation (I, extraluminal crater without extravasation; II, pericardial or myocardial blushing; III, perforation > or = 1-mm diameter with contrast streaming; and cavity spilling) was evaluated as a predictor of outcome and as a basis for management. Perforation was observed in 62 of 12,900 procedures reported (0.5%; 95% confidence interval, 0.4% to 0.6%), more commonly with devices intended to remove or ablate tissue (atherectomy, laser) than with PTCA (1.3%, 0.9% to 1.6% versus 0.1%, 0.1% to 0.1%; P < .001). The perforation population was notable for its advanced age (67 +/- 10 years) and high incidence of female sex (46%) (both P < .001 compared with patients without perforation). Perforation could be treated expectantly or with PTCA but without cardiac surgery in 85%, 90%, and 44% of class I, II, and III perforations, respectively. Class I perforations (n = 13, 21%) were associated with death in none, myocardial infarction in none, and tamponade in 8%. The incidences of these adverse events were 0%, 14%, and 13% in class II perforations (n = 31, 50%) and 19%, 50%, and 63% in non-cavity spilling class III perforations, respectively (n = 16, 26%). Two of the 15 instances of cardiac tamponade (13%) were delayed, occurring within 24 hours after dismissal from the catheterization laboratory. The incidence of perforation, while low, is increased with new devices. Women and the elderly are at highest risk. The clinical risk after perforation can be classified angiographically, but even low-risk perforations occasionally have poor clinical outcome. Patients should be observed for delayed cardiac tamponade for at least 24 hours.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Incidence, predictors, management, immediate and long-term outcomes following grade III coronary perforation.

            The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence, predictors, management, and clinical outcomes in patients with grade III coronary perforation during percutaneous coronary intervention. Grade III coronary perforation is a rare but recognized complication associated with high morbidity and mortality. From 24,465 patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention from May 1993 to December 2009, 56 patients had grade III coronary perforation. Most lesions were complex: 44.6% type B2, 51.8% type C, and 28.6% chronic total occlusions, and within a small vessel (≤ 2.5 mm) in 32.1%. Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors were administered in 17.9% of patients. The device causing perforation was intracoronary balloon in 50%: 53.6% compliant, 46.4% noncompliant; intracoronary guidewire in 17.9%; rotablation in 3.6%; and directional atherectomy in 3.6%. Following perforation, immediate treatment and success rates, respectively, were prolonged balloon inflation 58.9%, 54.5%; covered stent implantation 46.4%, 84.6%; coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) and surgical repair 16.0%, 44.4%; and coil embolization 1.8%, 100%. Multiple methods were required in 39.3%. During the procedure (n = 56), 19.6% required cardiopulmonary resuscitation and 3.6% died. In-hospital (n = 54), 3.7% required CABG, 14.8% died. The combined procedural and in-hospital myocardial infarction rate was 42.9%, and major adverse cardiac event rate was 55.4%. At clinical follow-up (n = 46) (median: 38.1 months, range 7.6 to 122.8), 4.3% had a myocardial infarction, 4.3% required CABG, and 15.2% died. The target lesion revascularization rate was 13%, with target vessel revascularization in 19.6%, and major adverse cardiac events in 41.3%. Grade III coronary perforation is associated with complex lesions and high acute and long-term major adverse cardiac event rates. Copyright © 2011 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Management and outcomes of coronary artery perforation during percutaneous coronary intervention.

              Coronary perforation is a particularly feared complication of percutaneous coronary intervention. The optimal management and predictors of adverse outcomes for these patients remain to be defined. Advances in management such as the use of polytetrafluoroethylene-covered stents have not been critically examined in terms of efficacy. We analyzed a cohort of patients who sustained coronary perforation during percutaneous coronary intervention at our institution during a 9-year period to examine the trends in incidence, management, and outcomes. The patient medical records were reviewed, and detailed angiographic analysis was undertaken to identify the predictors of adverse outcomes, including the development of tamponade, the requirement for emergency coronary artery bypass grafting, and in-hospital death. One year of follow-up was attempted for all patients. Seventy-two cases of coronary perforation were identified, with an overall incidence of 0.19%. The perforation grade and presence of chronic renal insufficiency were the only predictors of mortality on multivariate regression analysis. The use of polytetrafluoroethylene-covered stents to manage perforations was not associated with any reduction in adverse outcomes, such as the development of tamponade, the need for emergency coronary artery bypass grafting, or in-hospital death. In conclusion, coronary perforation remains a feared complication in the contemporary interventional era with significant in-hospital mortality. Emphasis should be placed on preventing this complication whenever possible, including exercising particular caution in patients with chronic renal insufficiency. The treatment of such patients should be tailored to the severity of the perforation. The optimal treatment of these patients needs to be defined, and the efficacy of covered stents needs to be studied prospectively.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                EuroIntervention
                EuroIntervention
                Europa Digital & Publishing
                1969-6213
                August 2017
                August 2017
                : 13
                : 5
                : e595-e601
                Article
                10.4244/EIJ-D-16-01038
                © 2017

                Comments

                Comment on this article