Key result
Lack of side branch protection is linked to a ~4.6-fold higher risk of occlusion.
Why the study?
Data on risk factors and periprocedural complications associated with side branch occlusion after chronic total occlusion recanalization are limited.
What are the predictors of side branch occlusion and does it increase periprocedural complications in patients undergoing successful recanalization of chronic total occlusions with bifurcation lesions?
Population
245 patients with CTO bifurcation lesions who underwent successful CTO recanalization
Comparison
Side branch occlusion vs no side branch occlusion
Design
Observational cohort study
Follow-up
Periprocedural
Authors
Loading...
SB occlusion after CTO recanalization was associated with higher periprocedural MI risk; supports SB protection but leaves optimal strategies open for prospective study.
Observational (n=245)
No
What are the predictors of side branch occlusion and does it increase periprocedural complications in patients undergoing successful recanalization of chronic total occlusions with bifurcation lesions?
Odds Ratio: 4.61 (95% CI 1.25–17.04)
Absolute Event Rate: 11.4% vs 3.4%
p-value: p=0.022
Side branch occlusion during CTO recanalization is associated with increased periprocedural complications and can be predicted by specific anatomical and procedural factors, highlighting the importance of side branch protection.
Guo et al. (2021) conducted an observational in Chronic total occlusion with bifurcation lesions (n=245). No side branch protection vs. Side branch protection was evaluated on Side branch occlusion (OR 4.61, 95% CI 1.25-17.04, p=0.022). Lack of side branch protection (OR 4.61), ≥50% ostial side branch stenosis (OR 5.37), and use of a dissection-reentry strategy (OR 4.25) independently predicted side branch occlusion.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: