心导管实验室的恐怖场景:冠状动脉介入治疗过程中导丝卡压的经皮处理

IF 0.3 Q3 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL European Journal of Therapeutics Pub Date : 2023-12-22 DOI:10.58600/eurjther1956
Serhat Kesriklioğlu, A. Şahin, Yakup Alsancak
{"title":"心导管实验室的恐怖场景:冠状动脉介入治疗过程中导丝卡压的经皮处理","authors":"Serhat Kesriklioğlu, A. Şahin, Yakup Alsancak","doi":"10.58600/eurjther1956","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Dear Editor, Advancements in invasive coronary angiography and accumulated experience have improved the success of interventions in challenging coronary artery lesions and associated complications. However, the approach and success in managing rare complications such as guide wire entrapment depend on the patient's hemodynamic status, continuity of coronary flow, capabilities of the angiography laboratory and the operator's expertise. In this letter, we present a case of guide wire entrapment during coronary intervention, the difficulties encountered during percutaneous removal attempts, and the finally applied conservative approach. Patient Information A 56-year-old male, known for active smoking and a history of three-vessel coronary bypass surgery four years ago, presented with pressing chest pain. The patient had undergone coronary angiography (CAG) a year ago, and medical follow-up was recommended. Due to the diagnosis of unstable angina pectoris, the patient underwent another angiography. Following the stent implantation for significant stenosis after the anastomosis in the saphenous-LAD graft, attempts to retrieve the guidewire resulted in stent deformation (Fig. 1) and entrapment. Despite efforts to retract the guidewire, it was unsuccessful. Subsequently, the case was urgently taken over, maintaining the catheter and guidewire in a sterile manner (Fig. 1). After obtaining cardiovascular surgical consultations, a decision was made to reattempt the procedure through percutaneous coronary intervention. After ensuring proper field cleanliness, the procedure began by confirming the absence of catheter thrombus. It was observed that there was no distal flow in the first images (Fig. 2). Attempts to enter the stent with a 1.0x12 mm Artimes balloon were unsuccessful, and after the balloon's deformation, a second attempt was made with another balloon but was also unsuccessful. Microcatheters were used to enter the stent, but they got trapped, and only after various manipulations, the microcatheter could be retracted. Subsequent attempts with PT-2 and Fielder XT-A Guidewires for the buddy wire technique were unsuccessful due to entrapment between stent struts (Fig. 1). Considering the thinness of the distal vessel and the chronic near 99% stenosis similar to previous CAG images, it was decided to attempt distal wire detachment due to the high surgical risk in this patient. However, despite attempts, the wire did not detach. During the wire retraction, the heart shadow on fluoroscopy moved, and the patient experienced severe pain. Since repeated pull-backs were unsuccessful, consecutive and prolonged torques were applied to the wire, resulting in distal wire fracture (Fig. 2). Echocardiographic control showed no effusion. The patient was transferred to the coronary intensive care unit. Following one day in the intensive care unit and two days in the cardiology service without symptoms, the patient was discharged with dual antiplatelet therapy. No anginal symptoms were reported during one-year follow-ups. Discussion Prior to coronary intervention, determining the appropriate strategy based on coronary anatomy and lesion characteristics, along with selecting the appropriate guide wire, constitutes the initial step in preventing complications related to the guide wire. Guide wire entrapment is rare, with an incidence of approximately 0.1-0.2% [1]. The localization of the entrapped wire, the patient's hemodynamic status, and the continuity of coronary blood flow determine the approach to the complication. In a review of 48 reports involving 67 patients, guide wire entrapment was treated surgically in 29 cases (43.3%), percutaneously in 28 cases (41.8%) and conservatively in 10 cases (14.9%) [1]. Techniques such as the multiwire technique, snare loop capture, microcatheter support, and balloon inflation can be applied percutaneously to release the trapped wire [2]. Various approaches have been developed over the years for managing a broken guide wire, given concerns about thrombosis, dissection, distal or systemic embolization caused by a broken piece of the system. Potential causes for guide wire breakage include aggressive manipulation, cutting with an atherectomy device, entrapment between stent struts, and wire deformation. Apart from percutaneous wire removal, surgical removal or conservative approaches may be considered depending on the patient's condition [3]. In cases where surgical decisions are made for additional reasons, surgical removal of the wire should be considered [4]. Complications such as hemodynamic deterioration and loss of coronary flow may necessitate urgent intervention. In hemodynamically stable patients, a conservative approach may be considered for wire fragments that do not affect coronary flow, especially those located distally or in insignificant side branches. In our case, it was believed that the wire broke from the region where it was entrapped due to excessive manipulation. Applying torque to the wire while it was still inside the microcatheter during the wire-breaking stage seemed to be a more suitable approach as it was thought to cause less damage to the surrounding structures. Evaluating the localization of the broken piece and its relationship with vessel and stent structures through intracoronary imaging (IVUS/OCT) is crucial for observation. In our case, the procedure was performed under urgent conditions, and we did not have a ready-to-use intracoronary imaging device. Due to the patient's stable hemodynamics after the distal wire manipulation and the wire's thin location in the distal vessel with chronic stenosis, we opted for a conservative approach. However, it is evident that our patient and we were fortunate due to the thin structure of the distal vessel and the small area affected by the flow. Complications would likely have a more fatal course in cases affecting larger feeding areas. The patient was discharged with dual antiplatelet therapy due to stent implantation. However, even if a stent had not been placed, it would be appropriate to provide dual antiaggregant therapy in the first six months of follow-up to prevent platelet activation caused by the broken guide wire [5]. No additional intervention was considered during the one-year follow-up due to the absence of active complaints. While experience and treatment methods for guide wire-related complications vary, further research is necessary. Yours sincerely","PeriodicalId":42642,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Therapeutics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Horrible Scenario in Cath Lab: Percutaneous Management of Guide Wire Entrapment During Coronary Intervention\",\"authors\":\"Serhat Kesriklioğlu, A. Şahin, Yakup Alsancak\",\"doi\":\"10.58600/eurjther1956\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Dear Editor, Advancements in invasive coronary angiography and accumulated experience have improved the success of interventions in challenging coronary artery lesions and associated complications. However, the approach and success in managing rare complications such as guide wire entrapment depend on the patient's hemodynamic status, continuity of coronary flow, capabilities of the angiography laboratory and the operator's expertise. In this letter, we present a case of guide wire entrapment during coronary intervention, the difficulties encountered during percutaneous removal attempts, and the finally applied conservative approach. Patient Information A 56-year-old male, known for active smoking and a history of three-vessel coronary bypass surgery four years ago, presented with pressing chest pain. The patient had undergone coronary angiography (CAG) a year ago, and medical follow-up was recommended. Due to the diagnosis of unstable angina pectoris, the patient underwent another angiography. Following the stent implantation for significant stenosis after the anastomosis in the saphenous-LAD graft, attempts to retrieve the guidewire resulted in stent deformation (Fig. 1) and entrapment. Despite efforts to retract the guidewire, it was unsuccessful. Subsequently, the case was urgently taken over, maintaining the catheter and guidewire in a sterile manner (Fig. 1). After obtaining cardiovascular surgical consultations, a decision was made to reattempt the procedure through percutaneous coronary intervention. After ensuring proper field cleanliness, the procedure began by confirming the absence of catheter thrombus. It was observed that there was no distal flow in the first images (Fig. 2). Attempts to enter the stent with a 1.0x12 mm Artimes balloon were unsuccessful, and after the balloon's deformation, a second attempt was made with another balloon but was also unsuccessful. Microcatheters were used to enter the stent, but they got trapped, and only after various manipulations, the microcatheter could be retracted. Subsequent attempts with PT-2 and Fielder XT-A Guidewires for the buddy wire technique were unsuccessful due to entrapment between stent struts (Fig. 1). Considering the thinness of the distal vessel and the chronic near 99% stenosis similar to previous CAG images, it was decided to attempt distal wire detachment due to the high surgical risk in this patient. However, despite attempts, the wire did not detach. During the wire retraction, the heart shadow on fluoroscopy moved, and the patient experienced severe pain. Since repeated pull-backs were unsuccessful, consecutive and prolonged torques were applied to the wire, resulting in distal wire fracture (Fig. 2). Echocardiographic control showed no effusion. The patient was transferred to the coronary intensive care unit. Following one day in the intensive care unit and two days in the cardiology service without symptoms, the patient was discharged with dual antiplatelet therapy. No anginal symptoms were reported during one-year follow-ups. Discussion Prior to coronary intervention, determining the appropriate strategy based on coronary anatomy and lesion characteristics, along with selecting the appropriate guide wire, constitutes the initial step in preventing complications related to the guide wire. Guide wire entrapment is rare, with an incidence of approximately 0.1-0.2% [1]. The localization of the entrapped wire, the patient's hemodynamic status, and the continuity of coronary blood flow determine the approach to the complication. In a review of 48 reports involving 67 patients, guide wire entrapment was treated surgically in 29 cases (43.3%), percutaneously in 28 cases (41.8%) and conservatively in 10 cases (14.9%) [1]. Techniques such as the multiwire technique, snare loop capture, microcatheter support, and balloon inflation can be applied percutaneously to release the trapped wire [2]. Various approaches have been developed over the years for managing a broken guide wire, given concerns about thrombosis, dissection, distal or systemic embolization caused by a broken piece of the system. Potential causes for guide wire breakage include aggressive manipulation, cutting with an atherectomy device, entrapment between stent struts, and wire deformation. Apart from percutaneous wire removal, surgical removal or conservative approaches may be considered depending on the patient's condition [3]. In cases where surgical decisions are made for additional reasons, surgical removal of the wire should be considered [4]. Complications such as hemodynamic deterioration and loss of coronary flow may necessitate urgent intervention. In hemodynamically stable patients, a conservative approach may be considered for wire fragments that do not affect coronary flow, especially those located distally or in insignificant side branches. In our case, it was believed that the wire broke from the region where it was entrapped due to excessive manipulation. Applying torque to the wire while it was still inside the microcatheter during the wire-breaking stage seemed to be a more suitable approach as it was thought to cause less damage to the surrounding structures. Evaluating the localization of the broken piece and its relationship with vessel and stent structures through intracoronary imaging (IVUS/OCT) is crucial for observation. In our case, the procedure was performed under urgent conditions, and we did not have a ready-to-use intracoronary imaging device. Due to the patient's stable hemodynamics after the distal wire manipulation and the wire's thin location in the distal vessel with chronic stenosis, we opted for a conservative approach. However, it is evident that our patient and we were fortunate due to the thin structure of the distal vessel and the small area affected by the flow. Complications would likely have a more fatal course in cases affecting larger feeding areas. The patient was discharged with dual antiplatelet therapy due to stent implantation. However, even if a stent had not been placed, it would be appropriate to provide dual antiaggregant therapy in the first six months of follow-up to prevent platelet activation caused by the broken guide wire [5]. No additional intervention was considered during the one-year follow-up due to the absence of active complaints. While experience and treatment methods for guide wire-related complications vary, further research is necessary. Yours sincerely\",\"PeriodicalId\":42642,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Therapeutics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Therapeutics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.58600/eurjther1956\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Therapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.58600/eurjther1956","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

亲爱的编辑,有创冠状动脉造影术的进步和经验的积累提高了对具有挑战性的冠状动脉病变及相关并发症进行介入治疗的成功率。然而,处理导丝夹持等罕见并发症的方法和成功率取决于患者的血流动力学状态、冠状动脉血流的连续性、血管造影实验室的能力和操作者的专业知识。在这封信中,我们介绍了一例冠状动脉介入治疗过程中导丝夹持的病例、尝试经皮取出导丝时遇到的困难以及最终采用的保守治疗方法。患者信息 一位 56 岁的男性患者,因主动吸烟和四年前接受过三血管冠状动脉搭桥手术而闻名。患者一年前接受了冠状动脉造影术(CAG),医生建议对其进行随访。由于被诊断为不稳定型心绞痛,患者再次接受了血管造影检查。因隐支-LAD移植血管吻合术后出现明显狭窄而植入支架后,试图收回导丝时导致支架变形(图1)并被夹住。尽管努力牵引导丝,但仍未成功。随后,医生紧急接管了该病例,在无菌状态下保留导管和导丝(图 1)。在征求心血管外科会诊意见后,决定再次尝试经皮冠状动脉介入手术。在确保现场清洁无误后,确认没有导管血栓后,手术开始。观察到第一张图像中没有远端血流(图 2)。尝试用 1.0x12 毫米 Artimes 球囊进入支架,但没有成功,球囊变形后,又用另一个球囊进行了第二次尝试,但也没有成功。使用微导管进入支架,但导管被卡住,经过各种操作后,微导管才得以缩回。随后又尝试使用 PT-2 和 Fielder XT-A 导丝进行伙伴导丝技术,但由于被支架支柱夹住而未成功(图 1)。考虑到该患者远端血管较细,且与之前的 CAG 图像相似,血管长期近 99% 的狭窄,考虑到手术风险较高,决定尝试远端导丝分离。然而,尽管进行了多次尝试,导线仍未脱离。在钢丝回拉过程中,透视图上的心脏阴影移动,患者感到剧烈疼痛。由于多次回拉均未成功,医生对导线施加了连续、长时间的扭矩,导致导线远端断裂(图 2)。超声心动图检查显示没有积液。患者被转入冠心病重症监护室。患者在重症监护室住了一天,在心脏科住了两天,没有出现任何症状,在接受双联抗血小板治疗后出院。在一年的随访中,患者没有出现心绞痛症状。讨论 在冠状动脉介入治疗前,根据冠状动脉解剖结构和病变特点确定适当的策略,同时选择合适的导丝,是预防导丝相关并发症的第一步。导丝夹层很少见,发生率约为 0.1-0.2%[1]。导丝缠绕的位置、患者的血流动力学状态以及冠状动脉血流的连续性决定了处理并发症的方法。在对涉及 67 名患者的 48 份报告进行的回顾中,导丝夹持的治疗方法包括手术治疗 29 例(43.3%)、经皮治疗 28 例(41.8%)和保守治疗 10 例(14.9%)[1]。多导线技术、套环捕捉、微导管支持和球囊充气等技术可用于经皮释放受困导线[2]。由于担心导丝系统断裂会导致血栓形成、剥离、远端或全身栓塞,多年来已开发出多种处理导丝断裂的方法。导丝断裂的潜在原因包括:粗暴操作、用动脉粥样硬化切除器械切割、支架支柱之间的夹层以及导丝变形。除了经皮移除导丝外,还可根据患者的病情考虑手术移除或保守治疗[3]。在因其他原因而决定手术的病例中,应考虑手术移除导线[4]。血流动力学恶化和冠状动脉血流丧失等并发症可能需要紧急干预。在血流动力学稳定的患者中,对于不影响冠状动脉血流的金属丝碎片,尤其是位于远端或不重要侧支的金属丝碎片,可以考虑采取保守方法。在我们的病例中,我们认为是由于过度操作导致钢丝从其缠绕的区域断裂。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The Horrible Scenario in Cath Lab: Percutaneous Management of Guide Wire Entrapment During Coronary Intervention
Dear Editor, Advancements in invasive coronary angiography and accumulated experience have improved the success of interventions in challenging coronary artery lesions and associated complications. However, the approach and success in managing rare complications such as guide wire entrapment depend on the patient's hemodynamic status, continuity of coronary flow, capabilities of the angiography laboratory and the operator's expertise. In this letter, we present a case of guide wire entrapment during coronary intervention, the difficulties encountered during percutaneous removal attempts, and the finally applied conservative approach. Patient Information A 56-year-old male, known for active smoking and a history of three-vessel coronary bypass surgery four years ago, presented with pressing chest pain. The patient had undergone coronary angiography (CAG) a year ago, and medical follow-up was recommended. Due to the diagnosis of unstable angina pectoris, the patient underwent another angiography. Following the stent implantation for significant stenosis after the anastomosis in the saphenous-LAD graft, attempts to retrieve the guidewire resulted in stent deformation (Fig. 1) and entrapment. Despite efforts to retract the guidewire, it was unsuccessful. Subsequently, the case was urgently taken over, maintaining the catheter and guidewire in a sterile manner (Fig. 1). After obtaining cardiovascular surgical consultations, a decision was made to reattempt the procedure through percutaneous coronary intervention. After ensuring proper field cleanliness, the procedure began by confirming the absence of catheter thrombus. It was observed that there was no distal flow in the first images (Fig. 2). Attempts to enter the stent with a 1.0x12 mm Artimes balloon were unsuccessful, and after the balloon's deformation, a second attempt was made with another balloon but was also unsuccessful. Microcatheters were used to enter the stent, but they got trapped, and only after various manipulations, the microcatheter could be retracted. Subsequent attempts with PT-2 and Fielder XT-A Guidewires for the buddy wire technique were unsuccessful due to entrapment between stent struts (Fig. 1). Considering the thinness of the distal vessel and the chronic near 99% stenosis similar to previous CAG images, it was decided to attempt distal wire detachment due to the high surgical risk in this patient. However, despite attempts, the wire did not detach. During the wire retraction, the heart shadow on fluoroscopy moved, and the patient experienced severe pain. Since repeated pull-backs were unsuccessful, consecutive and prolonged torques were applied to the wire, resulting in distal wire fracture (Fig. 2). Echocardiographic control showed no effusion. The patient was transferred to the coronary intensive care unit. Following one day in the intensive care unit and two days in the cardiology service without symptoms, the patient was discharged with dual antiplatelet therapy. No anginal symptoms were reported during one-year follow-ups. Discussion Prior to coronary intervention, determining the appropriate strategy based on coronary anatomy and lesion characteristics, along with selecting the appropriate guide wire, constitutes the initial step in preventing complications related to the guide wire. Guide wire entrapment is rare, with an incidence of approximately 0.1-0.2% [1]. The localization of the entrapped wire, the patient's hemodynamic status, and the continuity of coronary blood flow determine the approach to the complication. In a review of 48 reports involving 67 patients, guide wire entrapment was treated surgically in 29 cases (43.3%), percutaneously in 28 cases (41.8%) and conservatively in 10 cases (14.9%) [1]. Techniques such as the multiwire technique, snare loop capture, microcatheter support, and balloon inflation can be applied percutaneously to release the trapped wire [2]. Various approaches have been developed over the years for managing a broken guide wire, given concerns about thrombosis, dissection, distal or systemic embolization caused by a broken piece of the system. Potential causes for guide wire breakage include aggressive manipulation, cutting with an atherectomy device, entrapment between stent struts, and wire deformation. Apart from percutaneous wire removal, surgical removal or conservative approaches may be considered depending on the patient's condition [3]. In cases where surgical decisions are made for additional reasons, surgical removal of the wire should be considered [4]. Complications such as hemodynamic deterioration and loss of coronary flow may necessitate urgent intervention. In hemodynamically stable patients, a conservative approach may be considered for wire fragments that do not affect coronary flow, especially those located distally or in insignificant side branches. In our case, it was believed that the wire broke from the region where it was entrapped due to excessive manipulation. Applying torque to the wire while it was still inside the microcatheter during the wire-breaking stage seemed to be a more suitable approach as it was thought to cause less damage to the surrounding structures. Evaluating the localization of the broken piece and its relationship with vessel and stent structures through intracoronary imaging (IVUS/OCT) is crucial for observation. In our case, the procedure was performed under urgent conditions, and we did not have a ready-to-use intracoronary imaging device. Due to the patient's stable hemodynamics after the distal wire manipulation and the wire's thin location in the distal vessel with chronic stenosis, we opted for a conservative approach. However, it is evident that our patient and we were fortunate due to the thin structure of the distal vessel and the small area affected by the flow. Complications would likely have a more fatal course in cases affecting larger feeding areas. The patient was discharged with dual antiplatelet therapy due to stent implantation. However, even if a stent had not been placed, it would be appropriate to provide dual antiaggregant therapy in the first six months of follow-up to prevent platelet activation caused by the broken guide wire [5]. No additional intervention was considered during the one-year follow-up due to the absence of active complaints. While experience and treatment methods for guide wire-related complications vary, further research is necessary. Yours sincerely
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
European Journal of Therapeutics
European Journal of Therapeutics MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
48
期刊最新文献
Adalimumab Treatment in a Case of Treatment-Resistant Acne Conglobata Uncommon HLA Alleles Observed in a Poopulation of Istanbul Province Cavitating Mesenteric Lymph Node Syndrome in a Patient with Celiac Disease: Differential Diagnosis Based on Radiological Findings A Rare Cause of Unilateral Breast Mass: Burkitt Lymphoma Hello AI: Is it Time for A Revolutionary Change in the Health Professional Education System?
×
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