Journal of Invasive Cardiology最新文献

An 85-year-old woman was admitted to our hospital with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis. Preoperative computed tomography and transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) revealed a type I bicuspid aortic valve.

A 73-year-old man with a history of hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and obesity presented for cardiovascular evaluation. He was experiencing mild fatigue and dyspnea on exertion. Transthoracic echocardiogram (TTE) showed right ventricular dilation, which was otherwise unremarkable.

An 83-year-old woman with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis was referred for transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Diagnostic left heart catheterization documented diffuse 3-vessel coronary artery disease.

Objectives: In the trans-radial era, arm venous access for right heart catheterization (RHC) is rising. Procedural success is affected by many factors, including subclavian/innominate vein stenosis (SVS) and pre-existing wires or catheters. In a study published previously by the same authors, 2% of cases had unsuccessful RHC through the arm, predominantly due to SVS. Since that study, techniques to improve RHC success rates have been developed, including crossing the stenosis with a coronary guidewire, followed by balloon dilatation. We aimed to determine whether subclavian/innominate venoplasty allows successful RHC in patients with SVS.

Methods: Our retrospective study included patients who had RHC from the arm between November 1, 2019, and December 31, 2022 that was unsuccessful due to the inability to pass a catheter through the SVS, and then underwent balloon venoplasty. The success rate of completed RHC was then assessed.

Results: Out of 2506 RHCs via arm access, 2488 were successful with a catheter alone or over a guidewire. In 18 patients, venoplasty was needed for catheter passage over a guidewire. Post-dilatation, all 18 cases (100%) had successful RHC with a mean procedural time of 35.2 (SD = 15.5) minutes. The most common stenosis site was the subclavian vein in 13 patients (72.2%), and 12 patients (66.7%) had pacemaker/ implantable cardioverter defibrillator wires present.

Conclusions: Balloon dilatation of SVS is an efficacious method to improve the success rate of RHC from the arm. It is a safe technique that may prevent cross-over to a different access site, thereby improving patient satisfaction and reducing the possibility of alternate site complications.

A 65-year-old man with end-stage renal failure, severe aortic stenosis, and triple vessel coronary artery disease was admitted for percutaneous coronary intervention to the left anterior descending artery prior to transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

Background: There is variability in clinical and lesion characteristics as well as techniques in chronic total occlusion (CTO) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

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: 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: 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.