Effect of Coronary Artery Dominance In-terms of Presentation and In-hospital Outcomes of patients undergoing Primary PCI for Culprit Proximal Left Anterior Descending Artery

IF 0.2 Q4 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
L. Rai, Rajesh Kumar, S. Raza, M. Batra, Zafar Iqbal Mandokhail, Haroon Ishaque, Muhammad Ishtiaq Ali, Abdul Basit, M. Siddiqui, Kubbra Rahooja, Maryam Samad, Fawad Farooq, Z. Rehman, T. Saghir, J. Sial
{"title":"Effect of Coronary Artery Dominance In-terms of Presentation and In-hospital Outcomes of patients undergoing Primary PCI for Culprit Proximal Left Anterior Descending Artery","authors":"L. Rai, Rajesh Kumar, S. Raza, M. Batra, Zafar Iqbal Mandokhail, Haroon Ishaque, Muhammad Ishtiaq Ali, Abdul Basit, M. Siddiqui, Kubbra Rahooja, Maryam Samad, Fawad Farooq, Z. Rehman, T. Saghir, J. Sial","doi":"10.47144/phj.v56i1.2460","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: Objective of this study was to assess the difference in terms of presentation and in-hospital course between patients with right vs. left dominant arterial circulation undergoing “primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)” for culprit proximal left anterior descending artery (LAD).\nMethodology: We included consecutive adult (≥18 years) patients diagnosed with STE-ACS undergoing primary PCI for culprit proximal LAD. Patients were categorized into right vs. left dominant circulation on left heart catheterization. Demographic, clinical characteristics, presentation, and hospital course were compared between the matched (propensity matched) and unmatched cohort of patients with right vs. left dominance.\nResults: We included 775 patients, out of which 81.3% (630) were males and mean age was 54.59 ± 11.3 years. On coronary angiogram left dominance was observed in 14.3% (111). Single vessel disease was higher with left compared to right dominant system, 53.2% vs. 43.5%, respectively. The rate of slow flow/no-reflow (15.4% vs. 7.2%; p=0.0.230), heart failure (9.3% vs. 6.3%; p=0.299), and in-hospital mortality (5.1% vs. 3.6%, p=0.493) were not different between right vs. left dominance, respectively. In the matched cohorts, the frequency of slow flow/no-reflow (15.3% vs. 7.2%; p=0.056), heart failure (6.3% vs. 6.3%; p>0.999), and mortality (5.4% vs. 3.6%, p=0.493) were not different between right vs. left dominance, respectively.\nConclusion: No significant increase in complications and outcomes is witnessed among patients with left dominant arterial circulation undergoing primary PCI for culprit proximal LAD. However, careful handling of left main during intervention is warranted due lack of support from right system.","PeriodicalId":42273,"journal":{"name":"Pakistan Heart Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pakistan Heart Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47144/phj.v56i1.2460","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Objective of this study was to assess the difference in terms of presentation and in-hospital course between patients with right vs. left dominant arterial circulation undergoing “primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)” for culprit proximal left anterior descending artery (LAD). Methodology: We included consecutive adult (≥18 years) patients diagnosed with STE-ACS undergoing primary PCI for culprit proximal LAD. Patients were categorized into right vs. left dominant circulation on left heart catheterization. Demographic, clinical characteristics, presentation, and hospital course were compared between the matched (propensity matched) and unmatched cohort of patients with right vs. left dominance. Results: We included 775 patients, out of which 81.3% (630) were males and mean age was 54.59 ± 11.3 years. On coronary angiogram left dominance was observed in 14.3% (111). Single vessel disease was higher with left compared to right dominant system, 53.2% vs. 43.5%, respectively. The rate of slow flow/no-reflow (15.4% vs. 7.2%; p=0.0.230), heart failure (9.3% vs. 6.3%; p=0.299), and in-hospital mortality (5.1% vs. 3.6%, p=0.493) were not different between right vs. left dominance, respectively. In the matched cohorts, the frequency of slow flow/no-reflow (15.3% vs. 7.2%; p=0.056), heart failure (6.3% vs. 6.3%; p>0.999), and mortality (5.4% vs. 3.6%, p=0.493) were not different between right vs. left dominance, respectively. Conclusion: No significant increase in complications and outcomes is witnessed among patients with left dominant arterial circulation undergoing primary PCI for culprit proximal LAD. However, careful handling of left main during intervention is warranted due lack of support from right system.
冠状动脉优势对接受左前降支卡尔普里特近端PCI的患者的表现和住院结果的影响
目的:本研究的目的是评估右主动脉循环与左主动脉循环患者在主因左前降支(LAD)近端行“经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)”时的表现和住院过程的差异。方法:我们纳入了连续诊断为STE-ACS的成人(≥18岁)患者,他们接受了原发性PCI治疗罪魁祸首近端LAD。患者在左心导管时被分为右主导循环和左主导循环。在匹配(倾向匹配)和不匹配的左、右优势患者队列之间比较人口统计学、临床特征、表现和住院过程。结果:纳入775例患者,其中男性630例(81.3%),平均年龄54.59±11.3岁。冠状动脉造影显示左侧优势占14.3%(111)。左侧单支血管病变高于右侧优势系统,分别为53.2%和43.5%。慢流/无回流率(15.4% vs. 7.2%;P =0.0.230),心力衰竭(9.3% vs. 6.3%;P =0.299),住院死亡率(5.1% vs. 3.6%, P =0.493)在左、右两种方式下均无差异。在匹配的队列中,慢流/无回流的频率(15.3% vs. 7.2%;P =0.056),心力衰竭(6.3% vs. 6.3%;P >0.999),死亡率(5.4% vs. 3.6%, P =0.493)右、左优势组无差异。结论:左主动脉循环患者行原发性PCI治疗罪魁祸首近端LAD的并发症和预后无明显增加。然而,由于缺乏右侧系统的支持,在干预期间小心处理左主干是有必要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Pakistan Heart Journal
Pakistan Heart Journal CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
64
审稿时长
6 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信