Key result
Catheter-induced coronary artery dissection during PCI linked to ~4-fold higher in-hospital adverse events.
Why the study?
The incidence, predictors, and in-hospital outcomes of catheter-induced coronary artery dissection (CICAD) and the impact of postprocedural flow impairment on clinical outcomes were not well defined.
Does catheter-induced coronary artery dissection during PCI increase the risk of in-hospital adverse cardiovascular events?
Observational (n=17,225)
Yes
Does catheter-induced coronary artery dissection during PCI increase the risk of in-hospital adverse cardiovascular events?
Odds Ratio: 3.85 (95% CI 2.42–6.11)
Absolute Event Rate: 14.1% vs 4.7%
p-value: p=<0.001
Catheter-induced coronary artery dissection during PCI is a rare but serious complication associated with increased in-hospital adverse events, even when normal coronary flow is restored.
May warrant procedural caution during PCI; leaves open need for prospective validation of preventive strategies.
Despite the ever-increasing complexity of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), the incidence, predictors, and in-hospital outcomes of catheter-induced coronary artery dissection (CICAD) is not well defined. In addition, there are little data on whether persistent coronary flow impairment after CICAD will affect clinical outcomes. We evaluated 17,225 patients from 15 participating hospitals within the Japanese PCI registry from January 2008 to March 2016. Associations between CICAD and in-hospital adverse cardiovascular events were evaluated using multivariate logistic regression. Outcomes of patients with CICAD with or without postprocedural flow impairment (TIMI flow ≤ 2 or 3, respectively) were analyzed. The population was predominantly male (79.4%; mean age, 68.2 ± 11.0 years); 35.6% underwent PCI for complex lesions (eg. chronic total occlusion or a bifurcation lesion.). CICAD occurred in 185 (1.1%), and its incidence gradually decreased (p < 0.001 for trend); postprocedural flow impairment was observed in 43 (23.2%). Female sex, complex PCI, and target lesion in proximal vessel were independent predictors (odds ratio [OR], 2.18; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.53-3.10; OR, 2.19; 95% CI, 1.58-3.04; and OR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.06-2.28, respectively). CICAD was associated with an increased risk of in-hospital adverse events (composite of new-onset cardiogenic shock and new-onset heart failure) regardless of postprocedural flow impairment (OR, 10.9; 95% CI, 5.30-22.6 and OR, 2.27; 95% CI, 1.20-4.27, respectively for flow-impaired and flow-recovered CICAD). In conclusion, CICAD occurred in roughly 1% of PCI cases; female sex, complex PCI, and proximal lesion were its independent risk factors. CICAD was associated with adverse in-hospital cardiovascular events regardless of final flow status. Our data implied that the appropriate selection of PCI was necessary for women with complex lesions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hiraide et al. (2018) conducted an observational in Percutaneous coronary intervention (n=17,225). Catheter-induced iatrogenic coronary artery dissection (CICAD) vs. No CICAD was evaluated on In-hospital adverse cardiovascular events (composite of new-onset cardiogenic shock and new-onset heart failure) (OR 3.85, 95% CI 2.42-6.11, p=<0.001). Catheter-induced iatrogenic coronary artery dissection during percutaneous coronary intervention was associated with a significantly increased risk of in-hospital adverse cardiovascular events (OR 3.85).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: