Geographic diversity in chronic total occlusion percutaneous coronary intervention: insights from the PROGRESS-CTO registry.

CTO-PCI chronic total occlusion coronary artery disease percutaneous coronary intervention

Journal

The Journal of invasive cardiology
ISSN: 1557-2501
Titre abrégé: J Invasive Cardiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8917477

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
22 May 2024
Historique:
medline: 22 5 2024
pubmed: 22 5 2024
entrez: 22 5 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

There is variability in clinical and lesion characteristics as well as techniques in chronic total occlusion (CTO) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We analyzed patient and lesion characteristics, techniques, and outcomes in 11 503 CTO-PCI procedures performed in North America (NA) and in the combined regions of Europe, Asia, and Africa from 2017 to 2023 as documented in the PROGRESS-CTO registry. Eight thousand four hundred seventy-nine (74%) procedures were performed in NA. Compared with non-NA patients, NA patients were older, with higher body mass index and higher prevalence of diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidemia, family history of coronary artery disease, prior history of PCI, coronary artery bypass graft surgery and heart failure, cerebrovascular disease, and peripheral arterial disease. Their CTOs were more complex, with higher J-CTO (2.56 ± 1.22 vs 1.81 ± 1.24; P less than .001) and PROGRESS-CTO (1.29 ± 1.01 vs 1.07 ± 0.95; P less than .001) scores, longer length, and higher prevalence of proximal cap ambiguity, blunt/no stump, moderate to severe calcification, and proximal tortuosity. Retrograde (31.0% vs 22.1%; P less than .001) and antegrade dissection and re-entry (ADR) (21.2% vs 9.2%; P less than .001) were more commonly used in NA centers, along with intravascular ultrasound (69.0% vs 10.1%; P less than .001). Procedure and fluoroscopy times were longer in NA, while contrast volume and radiation dose were lower. Technical (86.7% vs 86.8%; P > .90) and procedural (85.4% vs 85.8%; P = .70) success and in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (1.9% vs 1.7%; P = .40) were similar in NA and non-NA centers. Compared with non-NA patients, NA patients undergoing CTO PCI have more comorbidities, higher CTO lesion complexity, are more likely to undergo treatment with retrograde and ADR, and have similar technical success and MACE.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
There is variability in clinical and lesion characteristics as well as techniques in chronic total occlusion (CTO) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
METHODS METHODS
We analyzed patient and lesion characteristics, techniques, and outcomes in 11 503 CTO-PCI procedures performed in North America (NA) and in the combined regions of Europe, Asia, and Africa from 2017 to 2023 as documented in the PROGRESS-CTO registry.
RESULTS RESULTS
Eight thousand four hundred seventy-nine (74%) procedures were performed in NA. Compared with non-NA patients, NA patients were older, with higher body mass index and higher prevalence of diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidemia, family history of coronary artery disease, prior history of PCI, coronary artery bypass graft surgery and heart failure, cerebrovascular disease, and peripheral arterial disease. Their CTOs were more complex, with higher J-CTO (2.56 ± 1.22 vs 1.81 ± 1.24; P less than .001) and PROGRESS-CTO (1.29 ± 1.01 vs 1.07 ± 0.95; P less than .001) scores, longer length, and higher prevalence of proximal cap ambiguity, blunt/no stump, moderate to severe calcification, and proximal tortuosity. Retrograde (31.0% vs 22.1%; P less than .001) and antegrade dissection and re-entry (ADR) (21.2% vs 9.2%; P less than .001) were more commonly used in NA centers, along with intravascular ultrasound (69.0% vs 10.1%; P less than .001). Procedure and fluoroscopy times were longer in NA, while contrast volume and radiation dose were lower. Technical (86.7% vs 86.8%; P > .90) and procedural (85.4% vs 85.8%; P = .70) success and in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (1.9% vs 1.7%; P = .40) were similar in NA and non-NA centers.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
Compared with non-NA patients, NA patients undergoing CTO PCI have more comorbidities, higher CTO lesion complexity, are more likely to undergo treatment with retrograde and ADR, and have similar technical success and MACE.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38776473
doi: 10.25270/jic/24.00056
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Auteurs

Michaella Alexandrou (M)

Minneapolis Heart Institute and Minneapolis Heart Institute Foundation, Abbott Northwestern Hospital, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.

Athanasios Rempakos (A)

Minneapolis Heart Institute and Minneapolis Heart Institute Foundation, Abbott Northwestern Hospital, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.

Deniz Mutlu (D)

Minneapolis Heart Institute and Minneapolis Heart Institute Foundation, Abbott Northwestern Hospital, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.

Ahmed Al Ogaili (A)

Minneapolis Heart Institute and Minneapolis Heart Institute Foundation, Abbott Northwestern Hospital, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.

James W Choi (JW)

Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital, Dallas, Texas, USA.

Paul Poommipanit (P)

University Hospitals, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.

Khaldoon Alaswad (K)

Henry Ford Cardiovascular Division, Detroit, Michigan, USA.

Mir Babar Basir (MB)

Henry Ford Cardiovascular Division, Detroit, Michigan, USA.

Rhian Davies (R)

WellSpan York Hospital, York, Pennsylvania, USA.

Farouc A Jaffer (FA)

Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

Raj H Chandwaney (RH)

Oklahoma Heart Institute, Tulsa, Oklahoma, USA.

Lorenzo Azzalini (L)

Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.

Nazif Aygul (N)

Selcuk University, Konya, Turkey.

Ahmed M ElGuindy (AM)

Aswan Heart Center, Magdi Yacoub Foundation, Cairo, Egypt.

Brian K Jefferson (BK)

Tristar Hospitals, Tennessee, USA.

Sevket Gorgulu (S)

Biruni University Medical School, Istanbul, Turkey.

Jaikirshan J Khatri (JJ)

Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.

Oleg Krestyaninov (O)

Meshalkin Novosibirsk Research Institute, Novosibirsk, Russia.

Dmitrii Khelimskii (D)

Meshalkin Novosibirsk Research Institute, Novosibirsk, Russia.

Jarrod Frizzell (J)

St. Vincent Hospital, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.

Basem Elbarouni (B)

St. Boniface General Hospital, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.

Omer Goktekin (O)

Memorial Bahçelievler Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.

Margaret B McEntegart (MB)

Department of Cardiology, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, USA.

Bavana V Rangan (BV)

Minneapolis Heart Institute and Minneapolis Heart Institute Foundation, Abbott Northwestern Hospital, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.

Olga C Mastrodemos (OC)

Minneapolis Heart Institute and Minneapolis Heart Institute Foundation, Abbott Northwestern Hospital, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.

M Nicholas Burke (MN)

Minneapolis Heart Institute and Minneapolis Heart Institute Foundation, Abbott Northwestern Hospital, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.

Yader Sandoval (Y)

Minneapolis Heart Institute and Minneapolis Heart Institute Foundation, Abbott Northwestern Hospital, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.

Emmanouil S Brilakis (ES)

Minneapolis Heart Institute and Minneapolis Heart Institute Foundation, Abbott Northwestern Hospital, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA. Email: esbrilakis@gmail.com.

Classifications MeSH