Why the study?
Does intracoronary adenosine reduce the incidence of no reflow in patients undergoing rotational atherectomy of complex native coronary artery lesions?
Does intracoronary adenosine reduce the incidence of no reflow in patients undergoing rotational atherectomy of complex native coronary artery lesions?
Intracoronary adenosine boluses administered during rotational atherectomy are safe and significantly reduce the incidence of the no-reflow phenomenon.
Adenosine was associated with lower no-reflow during rotational atherectomy; hypothesis-generating and requires randomized confirmation before practice change.
Rotational atherectomy (RA) of complex, calcified lesions has been associated with a high incidence of no reflow ranging from 6%-15% and concomitant myocardial necrosis with adverse prognostic implications. There are no uniform strategies for preventing this complication. The role of intracoronary adenosine for the prevention of this phenomenon during RA has not been fully evaluated. We studied the procedural outcome of 122 patients who underwent RA of complex native coronary artery lesions. Fifty-two patients received no adenosine but a variety of other agents. Seventy patients received intracoronary adenosine boluses (24 to 48 microgram prior to and after each RA run). There was no difference in the type of lesion studied, run time, or Burr to artery ratio (0.6-0.7) between the two groups. Six patients without adenosine experienced no reflow (11.6%), with resultant infarction in the target artery territory, while only 1 of 70 patients (1.4%, P - 0.023) in the adenosine group experienced no reflow. No untoward complications were observed during adenosine infusion. Intracoronary adenosine bolus administered during rotational atherectomy is easy, safe, and may significantly reduce the incidence of no reflow, which may improve the 30-day outcome of this procedure.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hanna et al. (1999) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: