English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Objective   To explore the feasibility and safety of the active retrograde backup (ARB) for treatment of chronic total occlusion (CTO) during retrograde percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).Background   Guiding support plays an important role in guidewire and microcatheter coronary channel (CC) tracking in retrograde PCI therapy for patients with CTO. However, the feasibility and safety of retrograde active use of a mother-and-child catheter are still unclear.  Patients and Methods.  A total of 271 consecutive patients with CTO who underwent retrograde PCI between January 2015 and January 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. Clinical data of two groups were compared to evaluate the feasibility and safety of ARB.Results   Of the 271 patients, 69.0% (187/271) underwent therapy through the septal branch, 31.0% (84/271) through the epicardial collateral channel, and 47.6% (129/271) through active retrograde extra backup with a mother-and-child catheter to facilitate retrograde microcatheter collateral CC tracking. The time of wire CC tracking was shorter in the ARB group than that in the non-ARB group (25.4 ± 8.5 vs 26.4 ± 9.7,  p =0.348), but there was no significant difference. The duration of the retrograde microcatheter tracking (10.2 ± 3.8 vs 15.5 ± 6.8,  p =0.012) and the retrograde approach (62.8 ± 20.3 vs 70.4 ± 24.3,  p =0.026) in the ARB group was significantly shorter than that in the non-ARB group. The radiation dose (223.6 ± 112.7 vs. 295.2 ± 129.3,  p =0.028), fluoroscopy time (50.6 ± 21.3 vs 62.3 ± 32.1,  p =0.030), and contrast volume (301.8 ± 146.7 vs 352.2 ± 179.5,  p =0.032) in the ARB group were significantly lower than that in the non-ARB group. There were no life-threatening procedural complications in either group. Complications unrelated to ARB included two cases of donor-vessel dissection, one case of CC perforation, and two cases of target-vessel perforation. There was no statistically significant difference in major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events between the groups during hospitalization ( p  > 0.05).Conclusion   ARB is feasible, safe, and conducive to guidewire and microcatheter CC tracking in the recanalization of coronary CTO. It improves procedural efficiency and is worthy of further promotion.

journal of interventional cardiology

Active Retrograde Extra Backup with a Mother-and-Child Catheter to Facilitate Retrograde Microcatheter Collateral Channel Tracking in Recanalization of Coronary Chronic Total Occlusion