Key result
Single-catheter PCI linked to ~6-minute shorter puncture-to-balloon time vs conventional PCI in STEMI.
Why the study?
Comparative data on single-catheter versus conventional two-catheter primary PCI workflows in STEMI patients are limited despite potential procedural delays with two-catheter use.
Does single-catheter PCI reduce puncture-to-balloon time compared to conventional two-catheter PCI in STEMI patients undergoing transradial primary PCI?
Cohort (n=268)
No
Does single-catheter PCI reduce puncture-to-balloon time compared to conventional two-catheter PCI in STEMI patients undergoing transradial primary PCI?
Absolute Event Rate: 9.5% vs 15.5%
p-value: p=<0.001
Single-catheter PCI improves intraprocedural efficiency by significantly reducing puncture-to-balloon time in STEMI patients without compromising periprocedural safety.
Single-catheter PCI may expedite STEMI workflows without safety signals; hypothesis-generating and requires randomized confirmation before practice change.
BACKGROUND: Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) is the gold-standard reperfusion strategy for acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). However, the conventional two-catheter percutaneous coronary intervention (C-PCI) workflow requires sequential use of diagnostic and guiding catheters, causing avoidable procedural delays. Single-catheter percutaneous coronary intervention (SC-PCI) uses a single universal guiding catheter for both coronary angiography and intervention, improving intraprocedural efficiency, but comparative data remain limited. METHODS: This single-center retrospective cohort study enrolled 268 consecutive STEMI patients undergoing transradial pPCI. Using 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM), baseline confounders were balanced between the SC-PCI and C-PCI groups. The primary endpoint was puncture-to-balloon (P2B) time; secondary endpoints included core procedural time metrics, intraprocedural exposure, safety, and short-term outcomes. Exploratory subgroup analyses were performed to assess the consistency of treatment effect. RESULTS: After PSM, 120 well-balanced patients (60 per group) were included. SC-PCI significantly reduced P2B time (median 9.5 vs. 15.5 min, p < 0.001), along with shorter puncture-to-angiography time, cath-lab door-to-balloon time, fluoroscopy duration, and lower contrast volume (all p < 0.05). No statistically significant differences were observed in procedural success, overall complication rates, or in-hospital mortality between groups. In exploratory subgroup analyses, the P2B benefit was consistent across subgroups, with no significant interactions (all p for interaction > 0.05). CONCLUSION: In this propensity-matched STEMI cohort, SC-PCI was associated with shorter P2B time and improved intraprocedural efficiency, with no significant differences in periprocedural safety outcomes, suggesting that SC-PCI may be a promising strategy to optimize STEMI interventional workflows.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kou et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) (n=268). Single-catheter percutaneous coronary intervention (SC-PCI) vs. Conventional two-catheter percutaneous coronary intervention (C-PCI) was evaluated on puncture-to-balloon (P2B) time (p=<0.001). Single-catheter PCI significantly reduced median puncture-to-balloon time compared to conventional two-catheter PCI (9.5 vs. 15.5 min, p < 0.001) in patients with STEMI.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: