Assessment of Left Ventricular Function After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Chronic Total Occlusion

Yasser M. Sammour MD, MSc, Rody G. Bou Chaaya MD, Chloe Kharsa MD, Jerrin Philip MD, Taha Hatab MD, Sahar Samimi MD, Joseph Elias MD, Momin Islam MD, Gal Sella MD, Joe Aoun MD, Sachin S. Goel MD, Neal S. Kleiman MD, Alpesh R. Shah MD
{"title":"Assessment of Left Ventricular Function After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Chronic Total Occlusion","authors":"Yasser M. Sammour MD, MSc,&nbsp;Rody G. Bou Chaaya MD,&nbsp;Chloe Kharsa MD,&nbsp;Jerrin Philip MD,&nbsp;Taha Hatab MD,&nbsp;Sahar Samimi MD,&nbsp;Joseph Elias MD,&nbsp;Momin Islam MD,&nbsp;Gal Sella MD,&nbsp;Joe Aoun MD,&nbsp;Sachin S. Goel MD,&nbsp;Neal S. Kleiman MD,&nbsp;Alpesh R. Shah MD","doi":"10.1016/j.jscai.2024.102460","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>The impact of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for chronic total occlusion (CTO) on left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) remains controversial.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We included patients who underwent CTO PCI (2018-2022) with reported baseline and follow-up LVEF (window 1-18 months). Stratified analyses according to procedural success, baseline LVEF, and target vessel were performed. Logistic regression analysis was performed to assess predictors of LVEF improvement.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>We included 142 patients with available LVEF data, of whom 121 had successful CTO PCI (85.2%). Overall, mean age was 65.4 ± 10.3 years, 76.1% were men, and 81.0% were White. The attempted CTO vessel was left anterior descending in 31.7%, left circumflex in 17.6%, and right coronary artery in 50.0% of patients. The median time from PCI to follow-up echocardiogram was 8.4 months (IQR, 4.4-12.4). After successful CTO PCI, mean LVEF increased from a baseline of 48.2% ± 15.4% to 51.8% ± 14.2% (ΔLVEF 3.6%; <em>P</em> &lt; .001). Among patients with depressed baseline LVEF &lt;50%, there was greater improvement in LVEF from 32.6% ± 9.7% to 40.0% ± 12.9% (ΔLVEF 7.6%; <em>P</em> &lt; .001), including 48.0% with ≥10% improvement. There was no change in LVEF after unsuccessful CTO PCI (54.6% ± 10.6% vs 55.2% ± 8.6%; <em>P</em> = .746). The ΔLVEF after successful CTO PCI to the left anterior descending, left circumflex, and right coronary artery was 2.6%, 4.0%, and 4.4%, respectively, overall, and 9.4%, 6.3%, 7.3% in patients with depressed baseline LVEF. Reduced baseline LVEF &lt;50% was a strong independent predictor of LVEF improvement after successful CTO PCI (adjusted odds ratio, 5.60; 95% CI, 2.27-13.84; <em>P</em> &lt; .001).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Successful CTO PCI seems to be associated with modest LVEF improvement, which is more pronounced in patients with reduced baseline LVEF.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":73990,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions","volume":"4 1","pages":"Article 102460"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772930324021495","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

The impact of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for chronic total occlusion (CTO) on left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) remains controversial.

Methods

We included patients who underwent CTO PCI (2018-2022) with reported baseline and follow-up LVEF (window 1-18 months). Stratified analyses according to procedural success, baseline LVEF, and target vessel were performed. Logistic regression analysis was performed to assess predictors of LVEF improvement.

Results

We included 142 patients with available LVEF data, of whom 121 had successful CTO PCI (85.2%). Overall, mean age was 65.4 ± 10.3 years, 76.1% were men, and 81.0% were White. The attempted CTO vessel was left anterior descending in 31.7%, left circumflex in 17.6%, and right coronary artery in 50.0% of patients. The median time from PCI to follow-up echocardiogram was 8.4 months (IQR, 4.4-12.4). After successful CTO PCI, mean LVEF increased from a baseline of 48.2% ± 15.4% to 51.8% ± 14.2% (ΔLVEF 3.6%; P < .001). Among patients with depressed baseline LVEF <50%, there was greater improvement in LVEF from 32.6% ± 9.7% to 40.0% ± 12.9% (ΔLVEF 7.6%; P < .001), including 48.0% with ≥10% improvement. There was no change in LVEF after unsuccessful CTO PCI (54.6% ± 10.6% vs 55.2% ± 8.6%; P = .746). The ΔLVEF after successful CTO PCI to the left anterior descending, left circumflex, and right coronary artery was 2.6%, 4.0%, and 4.4%, respectively, overall, and 9.4%, 6.3%, 7.3% in patients with depressed baseline LVEF. Reduced baseline LVEF <50% was a strong independent predictor of LVEF improvement after successful CTO PCI (adjusted odds ratio, 5.60; 95% CI, 2.27-13.84; P < .001).

Conclusions

Successful CTO PCI seems to be associated with modest LVEF improvement, which is more pronounced in patients with reduced baseline LVEF.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
48 days
期刊最新文献
Table of Contents Racial Disparities Among Patients Undergoing Balloon-Expandable Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Navigating Treble Clef Aorta: A Challenge for Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement—A Case Report Point-of-Care Ultrasound for the Detection of Vascular Access Site Complications—The ULTRASITCOM Study Evaluating Procedural Performance: A Composite Outcome for Atrial Septal Defect and Patent Ductus Arteriosus Closures
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1