Why the study?
Procedural PCI difficulty is not consistently depicted by available chronic total occlusion scores and is influenced by the characteristics of each chronic total occlusion cohort.
Which CTO PCI score best predicts procedural success in a real-world registry of expert and learning operators?
Which CTO PCI score best predicts procedural success in a real-world registry of expert and learning operators?
Current CTO PCI scores, including CASTLE and CL, offer only intermediate predictive value for procedural success in real-world practice involving operators of varying expertise.
CTO PCI scores warrant caution in procedural planning due to intermediate accuracy; leaves open need for better-validated models in diverse operator settings.
Procedural percutaneous coronary intervention difficulty is not consistently depicted by available chronic total occlusion scores and is influenced by the characteristics of each chronic total occlusion cohort. In our study population, including expert and learning operators, the CASTLE score had slightly better overall performance along with CL score. However, we found only intermediate performance in the c-statistic predicting chronic total occlusion success among all scores.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Salinas et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: