Key result
Cancer patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention face increased risks of in-hospital mortality, bleeding, and repeat revascularization, necessitating a multidisciplinary approach.
Why the study?
Shared risk factors and cancer treatments increase the risk of CAD, and cancer patients undergoing PCI face heightened risks of adverse outcomes.
What are the outcomes and challenges of percutaneous coronary intervention in cancer patients?
What are the outcomes and challenges of percutaneous coronary intervention in cancer patients?
PCI in cancer patients carries heightened risks of bleeding and thrombosis, necessitating best practices like radial access, intravascular imaging, and a multidisciplinary approach.
Supports multidisciplinary care for cancer patients post-PCI; leaves open optimal strategies pending prospective trials.
Introduction: There are numerous shared risk factors in the etiopathogenesis of coronary artery disease (CAD) and cancer both at epidemiologic and molecular level. Additionally, different modalities of treatment of cancer such as radiation, chemotherapy, immunotherapy, and hormonal therapies further increase the risk of CAD and acute coronary syndrome. Most large database analysis and single-center experiences have shown that cancer patients undergoing PCI are at an increased risk of in-hospital mortality, bleeding, repeat revascularization.Areas covered: In this review article the authors discuss the associations between CAD and cancer, challenges for PCI in cancer patients and outcome data.Expert opinion: Interventionists performing PCI on cancer patients should be cognizant of the heightened risk of bleeding, thrombosis, possible need for interruption of dual-antiplatelet therapy, and the increased risk of target lesion revascularization in this cohort. These risks may be partially mitigated by utilization of best practices such as the use of radial artery access, intravascular imaging for lesion assessment and stent optimization and avoidance of complex stenting strategies. Finally, it is of paramount importance to have a multidisciplinary approach consisting of the treating cardiologist, medical and/or surgical oncologist, and palliative medicine, and involve the patient and their family in making informed decisions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bharadwaj et al. (2020) conducted a review in Cancer patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was evaluated. Cancer patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention face increased risks of in-hospital mortality, bleeding, and repeat revascularization, necessitating a multidisciplinary approach.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: