Procedural and longer-term outcomes of wire- versus device-based antegrade dissection and re-entry techniques for the percutaneous revascularization of coronary chronic total occlusions

Lorenzo Azzalini, R Dautov, ES Brilakis, S Ojeda, S Benincasa, B Bellini, A Karatasakis, J Chavarría, BV Rangan, M Pan, M Carlino, A Colombo, S Rinfret

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Background: There are few data regarding the procedural and follow-up outcomes of different antegrade dissection/re-entry (ADR) techniques for chronic total occlusion (CTO) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Methods: We compiled a multicenter registry of consecutive patients undergoing ADR-based CTO PCI at four high-volume specialized institutions. Patients were divided according to the specific ADR technique used: subintimal tracking and re-entry (STAR), limited antegrade subintimal tracking (LAST), or device-based with the CrossBoss/Stingray system (Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA). Major adverse cardiac events (MACE: cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction and target-vessel revascularization) on follow-up were the main outcome of this study. Independent predictors of MACE were sought with Cox regression analysis. Results: A total of 223 patients were included (STAR . n=39, LAST . n=68, CrossBoss/Stingray . n=116). Baseline characteristics were similar across groups. Technical and procedural success was lower with STAR (59% and 59%), as compared with LAST (96% and 96%) and CrossBoss/Stingray (89% and 87%; . p .
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)78-83
Number of pages6
JournalInternational Journal of Cardiology
Volume231
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2017

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Procedural and longer-term outcomes of wire- versus device-based antegrade dissection and re-entry techniques for the percutaneous revascularization of coronary chronic total occlusions'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this