Correlates of Hemodynamic Instability During Non-Emergent Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Refining High-Risk Criteria for Utilizing Mechanical Circulatory Support

IF 1.9 3区 医学 Q3 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions Pub Date : 2025-03-07 DOI:10.1002/ccd.31478
Pavan Reddy, Waiel Abusnina, Felipe Quinones, Kalyan R. Chitturi, Ilan Merdler, Cheng Zhang, Matteo Cellamare, Itsik Ben-Dor, Nelson Bernardo, Hayder D. Hashim, Lowell F. Satler, Ron Waksman
{"title":"Correlates of Hemodynamic Instability During Non-Emergent Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Refining High-Risk Criteria for Utilizing Mechanical Circulatory Support","authors":"Pavan Reddy,&nbsp;Waiel Abusnina,&nbsp;Felipe Quinones,&nbsp;Kalyan R. Chitturi,&nbsp;Ilan Merdler,&nbsp;Cheng Zhang,&nbsp;Matteo Cellamare,&nbsp;Itsik Ben-Dor,&nbsp;Nelson Bernardo,&nbsp;Hayder D. Hashim,&nbsp;Lowell F. Satler,&nbsp;Ron Waksman","doi":"10.1002/ccd.31478","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Previous studies using high-risk criteria to select patients for mechanical circulatory support (MCS) during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) have not consistently shown a benefit in reducing adverse outcomes. Identifying correlates for intra-procedural hemodynamic instability (HI) may improve patient selection for MCS.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Consecutive, hemodynamically stable patients undergoing non-emergent PCI between 2018 and 2022 were reviewed. High-risk patients, defined by left ventricular ejection fraction ≤ 35% with unprotected left main intervention or LVEF ≤ 35% with 3-vessel disease, were compared to the non-high-risk patients. The primary outcome was HI during PCI, a composite outcome defined by the occurrence of death, cardiac arrest, emergent MCS, or the need for sustained vasopressor support.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>A total of 278 high-risk patients were compared to 2854 non-high-risk patients. The high-risk group was older with more comorbidities and poorer left ventricular ejection fraction (24.7% vs. 51.5%). The occurrence of HI was overall low but occurred more frequently in high-risk patients (4.3% vs. 2.2%, <i>p</i> = 0.025), mostly driven by sustained vasopressor need (75% vs. 66%, <i>p</i> = 0.023). Post-procedural adverse clinical events were more common in the high-risk group, including death (4.7% vs. 0.7%, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001). A predictive model for intraprocedural HI included: ejection fraction ≤ 25%, left main intervention, and atherectomy (AUC = 0.703), while 3-vessel disease, age and other clinical comorbidities were not strongly associated with HI.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>The rate of HI during contemporary, non-emergent PCI is very low. While Traditional high-risk PCI criteria are associated with HI, prediction may be improved by including only very low EF, left main intervention and atherectomy. Further studies are needed to evaluate whether utilizing risk factors for HI could be a more effective strategy for selecting patients of MCS during PCI.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":9650,"journal":{"name":"Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions","volume":"105 6","pages":"1486-1492"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ccd.31478","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Previous studies using high-risk criteria to select patients for mechanical circulatory support (MCS) during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) have not consistently shown a benefit in reducing adverse outcomes. Identifying correlates for intra-procedural hemodynamic instability (HI) may improve patient selection for MCS.

Methods

Consecutive, hemodynamically stable patients undergoing non-emergent PCI between 2018 and 2022 were reviewed. High-risk patients, defined by left ventricular ejection fraction ≤ 35% with unprotected left main intervention or LVEF ≤ 35% with 3-vessel disease, were compared to the non-high-risk patients. The primary outcome was HI during PCI, a composite outcome defined by the occurrence of death, cardiac arrest, emergent MCS, or the need for sustained vasopressor support.

Results

A total of 278 high-risk patients were compared to 2854 non-high-risk patients. The high-risk group was older with more comorbidities and poorer left ventricular ejection fraction (24.7% vs. 51.5%). The occurrence of HI was overall low but occurred more frequently in high-risk patients (4.3% vs. 2.2%, p = 0.025), mostly driven by sustained vasopressor need (75% vs. 66%, p = 0.023). Post-procedural adverse clinical events were more common in the high-risk group, including death (4.7% vs. 0.7%, p < 0.001). A predictive model for intraprocedural HI included: ejection fraction ≤ 25%, left main intervention, and atherectomy (AUC = 0.703), while 3-vessel disease, age and other clinical comorbidities were not strongly associated with HI.

Conclusion

The rate of HI during contemporary, non-emergent PCI is very low. While Traditional high-risk PCI criteria are associated with HI, prediction may be improved by including only very low EF, left main intervention and atherectomy. Further studies are needed to evaluate whether utilizing risk factors for HI could be a more effective strategy for selecting patients of MCS during PCI.

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
非紧急经皮冠状动脉介入治疗期间血流动力学不稳定的相关因素:改进使用机械循环支持的高风险标准。
背景:先前的研究使用高风险标准选择经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)期间进行机械循环支持(MCS)的患者,并没有一致显示出在减少不良后果方面的益处。识别术中血流动力学不稳定(HI)的相关因素可以改善MCS患者的选择。方法:回顾性分析2018 - 2022年间连续、血流动力学稳定的非急诊PCI患者。高危患者(无保护左主干干预时左心室射血分数≤35%或3支血管病变时LVEF≤35%)与非高危患者进行比较。主要终点是PCI期间的HI,这是一个复合终点,由死亡、心脏骤停、紧急MCS或持续升压药物支持的发生来定义。结果:278例高危患者与2854例非高危患者进行比较。高危组年龄较大,合并症较多,左室射血分数较差(24.7% vs. 51.5%)。HI的发生率总体较低,但在高危患者中发生率更高(4.3%对2.2%,p = 0.025),主要由持续的血管加压药物需求驱动(75%对66%,p = 0.023)。术后不良临床事件在高危组更为常见,包括死亡(4.7% vs. 0.7%)。结论:当代非急诊PCI中HI发生率非常低。虽然传统的高风险PCI标准与HI相关,但仅包括非常低的EF、左主干干预和动脉粥样硬化切除术可以改善预测。需要进一步的研究来评估利用HI的危险因素是否可以成为PCI期间选择MCS患者的更有效策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
8.70%
发文量
419
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions is an international journal covering the broad field of cardiovascular diseases. Subject material includes basic and clinical information that is derived from or related to invasive and interventional coronary or peripheral vascular techniques. The journal focuses on material that will be of immediate practical value to physicians providing patient care in the clinical laboratory setting. To accomplish this, the journal publishes Preliminary Reports and Work In Progress articles that complement the traditional Original Studies, Case Reports, and Comprehensive Reviews. Perspective and insight concerning controversial subjects and evolving technologies are provided regularly through Editorial Commentaries furnished by members of the Editorial Board and other experts. Articles are subject to double-blind peer review and complete editorial evaluation prior to any decision regarding acceptability.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Issue Information Issue Information Transcatheter Pulmonary Valve Replacement With a Novel Valve: Medium-Term Results From a Single Center Study Impact of Individual Culprit Coronary Arteries Revascularized by Primary PCI on Clinical Outcomes
×
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:604180095
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