{"title":"Comment on \"vessel-specific angiography-derived index of microcirculatory resistance in an all-comer population undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, a PIONEER IV trial substudy\".","authors":"Kanishka Harariya, Thakur Rohit Singh, Ankita Kalra, Swarupanjali Padhi, Fayaz Ahamed","doi":"10.1016/j.carrev.2026.01.007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carrev.2026.01.007","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47657,"journal":{"name":"Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2026-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146020168","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-01-14DOI: 10.1016/j.carrev.2026.01.003
Giora Weisz
{"title":"Editorial: The robot will cath you now.","authors":"Giora Weisz","doi":"10.1016/j.carrev.2026.01.003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carrev.2026.01.003","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47657,"journal":{"name":"Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2026-01-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146120772","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-01-14DOI: 10.1016/j.carrev.2026.01.005
John E Connolly, Anushka V Desai, Robert S Weinstein, Craig Cronin, Emily Joseph, Steven Hsu, Faisal Rahman
{"title":"Females are underrepresented in randomized controlled trials of mechanical circulatory support in cardiogenic shock.","authors":"John E Connolly, Anushka V Desai, Robert S Weinstein, Craig Cronin, Emily Joseph, Steven Hsu, Faisal Rahman","doi":"10.1016/j.carrev.2026.01.005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carrev.2026.01.005","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47657,"journal":{"name":"Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2026-01-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146020146","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-01-14DOI: 10.1016/j.carrev.2026.01.004
Himanshu Rai, Katie Kenny Byrne, Daniel O'Callaghan, Rory Durand, J J Coughlan, Roisin Colleran, Mark Kennedy, Gavin J Blake, Colm G Hanratty, Mark S Spence, Robert A Byrne
Background: The Patient Experience in the Catheterization Laboratory (PATCATH) Questionnaire was developed by the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Intervention (EAPCI) to evaluate patient understanding of coronary catheterization procedures. In this study, we aimed to compare patient experience after coronary catheterization using the PATCATH questionnaire following provision of standard printed patient information leaflets (PILs) and PILs supplemented by specially developed video animations to aid informed consent.
Methods: The PATCATH questionnaire was administered anonymously to patients following coronary catheterization at a single tertiary referral center over two consecutive time periods. The questionnaire comprises 17 questions, divided into 3 domains, assessing patient experience before, during, and after the procedure. During phase 1, standard PILs were provided (PIL group). In phase 2, the PILs were supplemented with videos (PIL+ video group).
Results: The PATCATH tool was administered to a total of 296 patients following cardiac catheterization (22% female, 60.5% aged >65 years). 213 patients were included in the PIL group and 83 in the PIL + video group. Overall, positive patient satisfaction was reported in each domain. Positive patient satisfaction was comparable in both the PIL and the PIL+ video group in all 3 domains (before: 96.7% versus 100%, p = 0.20; during: 96.3% versus 97.3%, p > 0.99; after: 98.6% versus 97.6%, p = 0.62).
Conclusions: The use of a video animation in addition to a PIL when performing informed consent did not result in an increase in patient satisfaction as assessed by the PATCATH questionnaire.
背景:欧洲经皮心血管介入协会(EAPCI)开发了导管实验室(PATCATH)患者体验问卷,以评估患者对冠状动脉导管手术的理解。在这项研究中,我们的目的是比较冠状动脉导管置管后的患者体验,使用PATCATH问卷,提供标准的打印患者信息传单(pil)和专门开发的视频动画补充的pil,以帮助知情同意。方法:连续两个时间段内,在单一三级转诊中心接受冠状动脉导管置入术的患者匿名接受PATCATH问卷调查。问卷包括17个问题,分为3个领域,评估患者在手术前、手术中和手术后的体验。在第一阶段,提供标准PIL (PIL组)。第2期:在PIL的基础上添加视频(PIL+视频组)。结果:共有296例心导管术后患者使用了PATCATH工具(22%为女性,60.5%为年龄在0 ~ 65岁之间)。PIL组213例,PIL + video组83例。总体而言,每个领域都报告了积极的患者满意度。在所有3个领域中,PIL组和PIL+ video组的阳性患者满意度具有可比性(治疗前:96.7% vs 100%, p = 0.20;治疗期间:96.3% vs 97.3%, p = 0.99;治疗后:98.6% vs 97.6%, p = 0.62)。结论:根据PATCATH问卷的评估,在执行知情同意时使用视频动画和PIL并没有导致患者满意度的增加。
{"title":"Administration of EAPCI patient video animation versus standard patient information leaflets in the catheterization laboratory: Impact on patient experience assessed using the PATCATH questionnaire.","authors":"Himanshu Rai, Katie Kenny Byrne, Daniel O'Callaghan, Rory Durand, J J Coughlan, Roisin Colleran, Mark Kennedy, Gavin J Blake, Colm G Hanratty, Mark S Spence, Robert A Byrne","doi":"10.1016/j.carrev.2026.01.004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carrev.2026.01.004","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Patient Experience in the Catheterization Laboratory (PATCATH) Questionnaire was developed by the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Intervention (EAPCI) to evaluate patient understanding of coronary catheterization procedures. In this study, we aimed to compare patient experience after coronary catheterization using the PATCATH questionnaire following provision of standard printed patient information leaflets (PILs) and PILs supplemented by specially developed video animations to aid informed consent.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The PATCATH questionnaire was administered anonymously to patients following coronary catheterization at a single tertiary referral center over two consecutive time periods. The questionnaire comprises 17 questions, divided into 3 domains, assessing patient experience before, during, and after the procedure. During phase 1, standard PILs were provided (PIL group). In phase 2, the PILs were supplemented with videos (PIL+ video group).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The PATCATH tool was administered to a total of 296 patients following cardiac catheterization (22% female, 60.5% aged >65 years). 213 patients were included in the PIL group and 83 in the PIL + video group. Overall, positive patient satisfaction was reported in each domain. Positive patient satisfaction was comparable in both the PIL and the PIL+ video group in all 3 domains (before: 96.7% versus 100%, p = 0.20; during: 96.3% versus 97.3%, p > 0.99; after: 98.6% versus 97.6%, p = 0.62).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The use of a video animation in addition to a PIL when performing informed consent did not result in an increase in patient satisfaction as assessed by the PATCATH questionnaire.</p>","PeriodicalId":47657,"journal":{"name":"Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2026-01-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146094479","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-01-14DOI: 10.1016/j.carrev.2026.01.002
Spencer B King
{"title":"Interventional cardiology training and the match.","authors":"Spencer B King","doi":"10.1016/j.carrev.2026.01.002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carrev.2026.01.002","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47657,"journal":{"name":"Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2026-01-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145994660","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-01-05DOI: 10.1016/j.carrev.2026.01.001
Own Khraisat, Triston Messer, Waleed Ismail, Ahmad Alqaseer, Hashem Samardali, Ehab Alkhawaldeh, Farishta Saifi, Dipal Patel, Pranaychandra Vaidya
Background: The Arrow® AC3™ Optimus™ Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump (IABP) is widely used for hemodynamic support in critically ill patients. Post-marketing surveillance data are essential to assess real-world safety and performance.
Methods: We conducted a systematic analysis of medical device reports related to the AC3™ Optimus™ IABP submitted to the FDA Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database between 2017 and 2025. Events were categorized into types of adverse events, device problems, and patient problems. Frequencies and proportions were calculated.
Results: A total of 920 adverse events were identified. The majority were malfunctions (901, 97.9 %), followed by injuries (16, 1.7 %) and deaths (3, 0.3 %). Two of the reported deaths were reviewed in detail but were not clearly attributable to the device. Device problems (n = 1054) were most commonly related to the alarm system (146, 13.9 %), battery (126, 12.0 %), and gas/air leaks (101, 9.6 %). Other frequent issues included power problems (61, 5.8 %), connection problems (70, 6.6 %), and mechanical problems (53, 5.0 %). Patient problems were reported in 12 cases, with hypotension (2, 16.7 %), arrhythmia (1, 8.3 %), cardiac arrest (1, 8.3 %), hemorrhage (1, 8.3 %), and death (1, 8.3 %) among the documented outcomes. The majority of excluded patient problem reports (911, 98.7 %) lacked clinical details or showed no symptoms.
Conclusions: Most reported adverse events with the AC3™ Optimus™ IABP involved device malfunctions rather than direct patient injury or death. The most frequent device-related issues involved the alarm system, battery function, and gas/air leaks. While direct causality between device use and patient deaths was not established, vigilance in monitoring, device maintenance, and user training remains crucial to minimize risk.
{"title":"Characteristic adverse events with the arrow® AC3™ optimus™ intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP): an analysis of the U.S. food and drug administration MAUDE database from 2017 to 2025.","authors":"Own Khraisat, Triston Messer, Waleed Ismail, Ahmad Alqaseer, Hashem Samardali, Ehab Alkhawaldeh, Farishta Saifi, Dipal Patel, Pranaychandra Vaidya","doi":"10.1016/j.carrev.2026.01.001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carrev.2026.01.001","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Arrow® AC3™ Optimus™ Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump (IABP) is widely used for hemodynamic support in critically ill patients. Post-marketing surveillance data are essential to assess real-world safety and performance.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a systematic analysis of medical device reports related to the AC3™ Optimus™ IABP submitted to the FDA Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database between 2017 and 2025. Events were categorized into types of adverse events, device problems, and patient problems. Frequencies and proportions were calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 920 adverse events were identified. The majority were malfunctions (901, 97.9 %), followed by injuries (16, 1.7 %) and deaths (3, 0.3 %). Two of the reported deaths were reviewed in detail but were not clearly attributable to the device. Device problems (n = 1054) were most commonly related to the alarm system (146, 13.9 %), battery (126, 12.0 %), and gas/air leaks (101, 9.6 %). Other frequent issues included power problems (61, 5.8 %), connection problems (70, 6.6 %), and mechanical problems (53, 5.0 %). Patient problems were reported in 12 cases, with hypotension (2, 16.7 %), arrhythmia (1, 8.3 %), cardiac arrest (1, 8.3 %), hemorrhage (1, 8.3 %), and death (1, 8.3 %) among the documented outcomes. The majority of excluded patient problem reports (911, 98.7 %) lacked clinical details or showed no symptoms.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Most reported adverse events with the AC3™ Optimus™ IABP involved device malfunctions rather than direct patient injury or death. The most frequent device-related issues involved the alarm system, battery function, and gas/air leaks. While direct causality between device use and patient deaths was not established, vigilance in monitoring, device maintenance, and user training remains crucial to minimize risk.</p>","PeriodicalId":47657,"journal":{"name":"Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2026-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145945552","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-01-05DOI: 10.1016/j.carrev.2025.12.023
Beni Rai Verma, Abhinav Sood, Kalyan Chitturi, Abdullah Al Qaraghuli, Dan Haberman, Cheng Zhang, Sevket T Ozturk, Vaishnavi Sawant, Yama Thakkar, Jason Galo, Waiel Abusnina, Itsik Ben-Dor, Brian C Case, Hayder Hashim, Ron Waksman
<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Danish-German (DanGer) Shock trial demonstrated that the use of a microaxial flow pump (Impella) reduced mortality compared to medical management in patients with acute ST elevation myocardial infarction complicated with cardiogenic shock (STEMI-CS). However, patients in the control arm of the DanGer Shock trial were not treated with an intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP), and data directly comparing Impella to IABP in this population is limited.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We identified STEMI-CS patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and IABP at our institution between January 1, 2013, and February 20, 2025. These patients were screened according to the selection criteria of the DanGer Shock trial and were compared to the Impella MCS device 2.5 or CP and standard-of-medical-care (SoMC) arms of the DanGer Shock trial.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our cohort included 102 STEMI-CS patients treated with IABP. Compared to Impella CP patients from the DanGer Shock trial, IABP patients had significantly higher rates of hypertension, diabetes mellitus, heart failure, and SCAI stage E cardiogenic shock, but significantly lower rates of mechanical ventilation, vasopressor, and inotrope use. At 180 days, IABP patients had similar all-cause mortality compared to Impella CP patients (35.9 % vs. 45.8 %, p = 0.06), and lower rates of major bleeding (6 % vs. 39 %, p < 0.001) and renal replacement therapy (8 % vs. 75 %, p < 0.001). Additionally, IABP patients had lower mortality compared to SoMC patients (35.9 % vs. 58.5 %, p = 0.0004).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These findings support the hypothesis that STEMI-CS patients treated with IABP have comparable 180-day mortality to those treated with Impella CP and lower mortality than those receiving standard medical care. STEMI-CS cohort is heterogenous and IABP use may be beneficial in certain patients. Well-designed randomized trials comparing Impella CP and IABP in this patient population are warranted to inform clinical decision-making.</p><p><strong>Condensed abstract: </strong>Acute ST elevation myocardial infarction complicated with cardiogenic shock (STEMI-CS) portends a high mortality risk. New American guidelines now recommend a peripherally inserted left ventricular assist device, such as Impella, as a Class II indication for the management of STEMI-CS patients. Further, guidelines now give intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) as a class III indication for these patients. However, there is a need of direct head-to-head comparison of these two mechanical support modalities in this specific subset of patients. In this analysis, we identified STEMI-CS patients treated with IABP at our institution and compared them to the Impella CP cohort from the DanGer Shock trial. We found that both modalities had similar mortality rates, and IABP has lower mortality rates when compared to standard medical cohort from the trial. However, despite applying
背景:丹麦-德国(DanGer)休克试验表明,与药物治疗相比,使用微轴流泵(Impella)可降低急性ST段抬高型心肌梗死合并心源性休克(STEMI-CS)患者的死亡率。然而,在危险休克试验的对照组中,患者没有接受主动脉内球囊泵(IABP)治疗,在该人群中直接比较Impella和IABP的数据有限。方法:选取2013年1月1日至2025年2月20日在我院接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)和IABP治疗的STEMI-CS患者。根据危险休克试验的选择标准筛选这些患者,并将其与危险休克试验的Impella MCS装置2.5或CP和标准医疗护理(SoMC)组进行比较。结果:我们的队列包括102例接受IABP治疗的STEMI-CS患者。与来自DanGer Shock试验的Impella CP患者相比,IABP患者的高血压、糖尿病、心力衰竭和SCAI E期心源性休克的发生率明显较高,但机械通气、血管加压药和肌力药物的使用率明显较低。180天时,IABP患者的全因死亡率与Impella CP患者相似(35.9% vs. 45.8%, p = 0.06),大出血率更低(6% vs. 39%, p)。结论:这些发现支持STEMI-CS患者接受IABP治疗的180天死亡率与Impella CP治疗的患者相当,死亡率低于接受标准医疗护理的患者。STEMI-CS队列是异质性的,使用IABP可能对某些患者有益。设计良好的随机试验比较Impella CP和IABP在该患者群体中有必要为临床决策提供信息。摘要:急性ST段抬高型心肌梗死合并心源性休克(STEMI-CS)具有较高的死亡风险。新的美国指南现在推荐外周插入的左心室辅助装置,如Impella,作为STEMI-CS患者治疗的II级指证。此外,指南现在将主动脉内球囊泵(IABP)作为这些患者的III级指征。然而,在这一特定的患者群体中,需要对这两种机械支持方式进行直接的比较。在本分析中,我们确定了我院接受IABP治疗的STEMI-CS患者,并将其与来自DanGer Shock试验的Impella CP队列进行了比较。我们发现两种方式的死亡率相似,与试验中的标准医学队列相比,IABP的死亡率更低。然而,尽管应用了危险休克选择标准,组间差异仍然存在。与Impella CP相比,IABP的并发症发生率更低。这些发现支持IABP在某些STEMI-CS患者的治疗中使用,其临床应用不应被低估。
{"title":"Comparison of clinical outcomes of acute myocardial infarction patients complicated with cardiogenic shock treated with intra-aortic balloon pump versus microaxial flow pump.","authors":"Beni Rai Verma, Abhinav Sood, Kalyan Chitturi, Abdullah Al Qaraghuli, Dan Haberman, Cheng Zhang, Sevket T Ozturk, Vaishnavi Sawant, Yama Thakkar, Jason Galo, Waiel Abusnina, Itsik Ben-Dor, Brian C Case, Hayder Hashim, Ron Waksman","doi":"10.1016/j.carrev.2025.12.023","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carrev.2025.12.023","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Danish-German (DanGer) Shock trial demonstrated that the use of a microaxial flow pump (Impella) reduced mortality compared to medical management in patients with acute ST elevation myocardial infarction complicated with cardiogenic shock (STEMI-CS). However, patients in the control arm of the DanGer Shock trial were not treated with an intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP), and data directly comparing Impella to IABP in this population is limited.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We identified STEMI-CS patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and IABP at our institution between January 1, 2013, and February 20, 2025. These patients were screened according to the selection criteria of the DanGer Shock trial and were compared to the Impella MCS device 2.5 or CP and standard-of-medical-care (SoMC) arms of the DanGer Shock trial.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our cohort included 102 STEMI-CS patients treated with IABP. Compared to Impella CP patients from the DanGer Shock trial, IABP patients had significantly higher rates of hypertension, diabetes mellitus, heart failure, and SCAI stage E cardiogenic shock, but significantly lower rates of mechanical ventilation, vasopressor, and inotrope use. At 180 days, IABP patients had similar all-cause mortality compared to Impella CP patients (35.9 % vs. 45.8 %, p = 0.06), and lower rates of major bleeding (6 % vs. 39 %, p < 0.001) and renal replacement therapy (8 % vs. 75 %, p < 0.001). Additionally, IABP patients had lower mortality compared to SoMC patients (35.9 % vs. 58.5 %, p = 0.0004).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These findings support the hypothesis that STEMI-CS patients treated with IABP have comparable 180-day mortality to those treated with Impella CP and lower mortality than those receiving standard medical care. STEMI-CS cohort is heterogenous and IABP use may be beneficial in certain patients. Well-designed randomized trials comparing Impella CP and IABP in this patient population are warranted to inform clinical decision-making.</p><p><strong>Condensed abstract: </strong>Acute ST elevation myocardial infarction complicated with cardiogenic shock (STEMI-CS) portends a high mortality risk. New American guidelines now recommend a peripherally inserted left ventricular assist device, such as Impella, as a Class II indication for the management of STEMI-CS patients. Further, guidelines now give intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) as a class III indication for these patients. However, there is a need of direct head-to-head comparison of these two mechanical support modalities in this specific subset of patients. In this analysis, we identified STEMI-CS patients treated with IABP at our institution and compared them to the Impella CP cohort from the DanGer Shock trial. We found that both modalities had similar mortality rates, and IABP has lower mortality rates when compared to standard medical cohort from the trial. However, despite applying","PeriodicalId":47657,"journal":{"name":"Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2026-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145994657","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-01-05DOI: 10.1016/j.carrev.2025.12.024
Ehab Cherif, Husam Abdulaziz Noor
Background: Hybrid drug-eluting stent/drug-coated balloon percutaneous coronary intervention (DES-DCB PCI) aims to minimize stent burden while maintaining patency in chronic total occlusion lesions.
Methods: We prospectively studied 19 consecutive CTO patients treated with a hybrid DES-DCB strategy; primary endpoint was late lumen loss (LLL) at 3-4 months, with secondary clinical outcomes at six months.
Results: Technical success was 89.5 %; mean LLL was 0.10 ± 0.83 mm; late lumen gain occurred in ~53 % of patients completing angiographic follow-up; binary restenosis was 10.5 %. Residual stenosis strongly predicted LLL, while optimal DCB sizing and inflation ≥180 s were protective; residual stenosis remained the independent predictor in multivariable regression. IVUS guidance was associated with 0 % restenosis.
Conclusions: Hybrid DES-DCB PCI for CTOs was feasible with low LLL. Outcomes hinged on lesion preparation, sizing, and inflation duration. The six-component GLOW score provides intra-procedural risk stratification and warrants multicenter validation.
{"title":"Hybrid (DES + DCB) strategy for chronic total occlusions: Development of the GLOW risk stratification score.","authors":"Ehab Cherif, Husam Abdulaziz Noor","doi":"10.1016/j.carrev.2025.12.024","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carrev.2025.12.024","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Hybrid drug-eluting stent/drug-coated balloon percutaneous coronary intervention (DES-DCB PCI) aims to minimize stent burden while maintaining patency in chronic total occlusion lesions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We prospectively studied 19 consecutive CTO patients treated with a hybrid DES-DCB strategy; primary endpoint was late lumen loss (LLL) at 3-4 months, with secondary clinical outcomes at six months.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Technical success was 89.5 %; mean LLL was 0.10 ± 0.83 mm; late lumen gain occurred in ~53 % of patients completing angiographic follow-up; binary restenosis was 10.5 %. Residual stenosis strongly predicted LLL, while optimal DCB sizing and inflation ≥180 s were protective; residual stenosis remained the independent predictor in multivariable regression. IVUS guidance was associated with 0 % restenosis.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Hybrid DES-DCB PCI for CTOs was feasible with low LLL. Outcomes hinged on lesion preparation, sizing, and inflation duration. The six-component GLOW score provides intra-procedural risk stratification and warrants multicenter validation.</p>","PeriodicalId":47657,"journal":{"name":"Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2026-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145949376","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-01-02DOI: 10.1016/j.carrev.2025.12.025
Mehmet Cilingiroglu, Ibrahim Inanc
{"title":"Do we still need routine pre-discharge echocardiography after LAAC?","authors":"Mehmet Cilingiroglu, Ibrahim Inanc","doi":"10.1016/j.carrev.2025.12.025","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carrev.2025.12.025","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47657,"journal":{"name":"Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2026-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145991413","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}