Exaggeration of Non-Culprit Coronary Artery Stenosis in the Setting of Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Single Center Observational Study
<h3>Objective</h3><p dir="ltr">We sought to evaluate if the non-culprit coronary artery stenosis severity is affected by primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) compared with non-PPCI settings.</p><h3>Methods</h3><p dir="ltr">Re...
محفوظ في:
| المؤلف الرئيسي: | |
|---|---|
| مؤلفون آخرون: | , , , , |
| منشور في: |
2021
|
| الموضوعات: | |
| الوسوم: |
إضافة وسم
لا توجد وسوم, كن أول من يضع وسما على هذه التسجيلة!
|
| الملخص: | <h3>Objective</h3><p dir="ltr">We sought to evaluate if the non-culprit coronary artery stenosis severity is affected by primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) compared with non-PPCI settings.</p><h3>Methods</h3><p dir="ltr">Review of all the PPCI angiograms was performed at our catheterization laboratory between 15th October 2013 and 15th October 2014. All patients with severe multi-vessel coronary artery disease (MV CAD) who underwent second angiograms (either during the same admission or after discharge) were analyzed. Non-culprit lesions in the PPCI and non-PPCI angiograms were compared. Two investigators blinded to the procedure dates analyzed the severity of the lesions using validated quantitative coronary angiography software (QCA).<br></p><h3>Results</h3><p dir="ltr">Among 777 patients who underwent PPCI, 458 had multi-vessel disease. Additional angiography to treat non-culprit lesions was performed in 104, of these, 69 patients had a combined total of 74 lesions suitable for QCA analysis. The second angiogram was performed during the same admission (mean 4± 2.7 days) and after discharge (mean 115± 84 days) for 48 and 21 patients, respectively. Compared to PPCI angiograms, the non-PPCI angiograms showed a statistically significant reduction in the percentage of stenosis (71.6± 14.4% vs 64.5± 14.4%, <i>p</i>≤ 0.001), and an increase in minimal luminal diameter (0.82± 0.45 mm vs 1.00± 0.44 mm, <i>p</i>≤ 0.001) of non-culprit lesion. However, no significant difference was observed in the reference diameter (2.89± 0.69 mm vs 2.83± 0.64 mm, <i>p</i>=0.1) of the non-culprit lesion in both angiograms. Furthermore, these differences in the lesion parameters remain constant whether the second angiogram was performed during the same admission or performed after discharge (73.3± 14% and 66.2± 12.9% vs 68.4± 15% and 61.2± 16%, p=0.1).</p><h3>Conclusion</h3><p dir="ltr">The severity of non-culprit lesion is exaggerated in the PPCI setting. The non-culprit lesion exaggeration remains constant whether the second angiogram was performed early within a few days or later after several weeks.</p><h2>Other Information</h2><p dir="ltr">Published in: Research Reports in Clinical Cardiology<br>License: <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" target="_blank">http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</a><br>See article on publisher's website: <a href="https://dx.doi.org/10.2147/rrcc.s280661" target="_blank">https://dx.doi.org/10.2147/rrcc.s280661</a></p> |
|---|