将 J-CTO 评分应用于基于斑块内导丝跟踪的支架内慢性全闭塞再通术

Chieh-Yu Chen, Chi-Hung Huang, Jen-Fang Cheng, Chien-Lin Lee, Jiunn-Yang Chiang, Shih-Chi Liu, Chi-Jen Chang, Chia-Pin Lin, Cheng-Ting Tsai, Jun-Ting Liu, Chia-Ti Tsai, Yi-Chih Wang, Juey-Jen Hwang
{"title":"将 J-CTO 评分应用于基于斑块内导丝跟踪的支架内慢性全闭塞再通术","authors":"Chieh-Yu Chen, Chi-Hung Huang, Jen-Fang Cheng, Chien-Lin Lee, Jiunn-Yang Chiang, Shih-Chi Liu, Chi-Jen Chang, Chia-Pin Lin, Cheng-Ting Tsai, Jun-Ting Liu, Chia-Ti Tsai, Yi-Chih Wang, Juey-Jen Hwang","doi":"10.1101/2024.08.21.24312395","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: The application of the J-CTO score for in-stent chronic total occlusion (CTO) recanalization remains unclear. We aimed to compare the role of J-CTO score in in-stent and de novo CTO interventions using intraplaque guidewire tracking techniques.\nMethods: The application of the J-CTO score to assess procedural feasibility and guidewire crossing time for in-stent (N=74, 14.6%) and de novo CTO (N=434, 85.4%) interventions was evaluated in consecutive 508 patients (64.1±11.6 years, 446 men). Failed intraplaque tracking (N=3) or guidewires crossing (N=35) was considered procedural failures (38/508=7.5%).\nResults: The procedural success rate for de novo CTOs significantly declined when the J-CTO score was >2 (85 vs. ≤2: 97%, p<0.001), but was comparable for in-stent CTOs (>2: 96 vs. ≤2: 100%, p=0.400). Among 470 patients with successful recanalization, the guidewire crossing time ≥30 minutes was required less for in-stent than for de novo CTOs (OR=0.40, 95% CI=0.18-0.86) with J-CTO score ≥2 in multivariate analysis. For those with successful antegrade-only wiring, the guidewire crossing time shown by Kaplan-Meier curves was significantly related to the J-CTO score for either in-stent (N=72) or de novo (N=370) CTOs (both p<0.001 by log-rank test). However, only blunt stump (15.0±5.6 min) and occlusion ≥20mm (16.2±5.6 min) were independent time-determining factors of guidewire crossing (both p<0.01) for in-stent CTOs. Conclusion: With the intraplaque tracking strategy, the effects of the J-CTO score on procedural feasibility and guidewire crossing time differ for in-stent and de novo CTOs. Therefore, the J-CTO score should be cautiously interpreted during in-stent CTO interventions.","PeriodicalId":501297,"journal":{"name":"medRxiv - Cardiovascular Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Application of the J-CTO Score to Intraplaque Guidewire Tracking-Based Recanalization for In-Stent Chronic Total Occlusions\",\"authors\":\"Chieh-Yu Chen, Chi-Hung Huang, Jen-Fang Cheng, Chien-Lin Lee, Jiunn-Yang Chiang, Shih-Chi Liu, Chi-Jen Chang, Chia-Pin Lin, Cheng-Ting Tsai, Jun-Ting Liu, Chia-Ti Tsai, Yi-Chih Wang, Juey-Jen Hwang\",\"doi\":\"10.1101/2024.08.21.24312395\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: The application of the J-CTO score for in-stent chronic total occlusion (CTO) recanalization remains unclear. We aimed to compare the role of J-CTO score in in-stent and de novo CTO interventions using intraplaque guidewire tracking techniques.\\nMethods: The application of the J-CTO score to assess procedural feasibility and guidewire crossing time for in-stent (N=74, 14.6%) and de novo CTO (N=434, 85.4%) interventions was evaluated in consecutive 508 patients (64.1±11.6 years, 446 men). Failed intraplaque tracking (N=3) or guidewires crossing (N=35) was considered procedural failures (38/508=7.5%).\\nResults: The procedural success rate for de novo CTOs significantly declined when the J-CTO score was >2 (85 vs. ≤2: 97%, p<0.001), but was comparable for in-stent CTOs (>2: 96 vs. ≤2: 100%, p=0.400). Among 470 patients with successful recanalization, the guidewire crossing time ≥30 minutes was required less for in-stent than for de novo CTOs (OR=0.40, 95% CI=0.18-0.86) with J-CTO score ≥2 in multivariate analysis. For those with successful antegrade-only wiring, the guidewire crossing time shown by Kaplan-Meier curves was significantly related to the J-CTO score for either in-stent (N=72) or de novo (N=370) CTOs (both p<0.001 by log-rank test). However, only blunt stump (15.0±5.6 min) and occlusion ≥20mm (16.2±5.6 min) were independent time-determining factors of guidewire crossing (both p<0.01) for in-stent CTOs. Conclusion: With the intraplaque tracking strategy, the effects of the J-CTO score on procedural feasibility and guidewire crossing time differ for in-stent and de novo CTOs. Therefore, the J-CTO score should be cautiously interpreted during in-stent CTO interventions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":501297,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"medRxiv - Cardiovascular Medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"medRxiv - Cardiovascular Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.08.21.24312395\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"medRxiv - Cardiovascular Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.08.21.24312395","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:J-CTO评分在支架内慢性全闭塞(CTO)再通中的应用仍不明确。我们旨在比较 J-CTO 评分在使用斑块内导丝追踪技术进行支架内和新生 CTO 干预中的作用:我们对连续 508 例患者(64.1±11.6 岁,446 例男性)应用 J-CTO 评分评估支架内(74 例,14.6%)和新生 CTO(434 例,85.4%)介入的手术可行性和导丝穿越时间进行了评估。斑块内追踪失败(3例)或导丝穿越失败(35例)被视为手术失败(38/508=7.5%):结果:当J-CTO评分为>2时,新发CTO的手术成功率明显下降(85 vs. ≤2:97%,p<0.001),但支架内CTO的手术成功率相当(>2:96 vs. ≤2:100%,p=0.400)。在470例成功再通畅的患者中,在多变量分析中,J-CTO评分≥2的支架内CTO比新生CTO所需的导丝穿越时间≥30分钟更少(OR=0.40,95% CI=0.18-0.86)。对于成功进行纯抗降级布线的患者,Kaplan-Meier 曲线显示的导丝穿越时间与支架内(72 例)或新生(370 例)CTO 的 J-CTO 评分显著相关(对数秩检验均为 p<0.001)。然而,对于支架内 CTO,只有钝残端(15.0±5.6 分钟)和闭塞≥20 毫米(16.2±5.6 分钟)是导丝穿越的独立时间决定因素(均为 p<0.01)。结论在斑块内追踪策略下,J-CTO 评分对支架内和新生 CTO 的手术可行性和导丝穿刺时间的影响是不同的。因此,在对支架内 CTO 进行介入治疗时,应谨慎解释 J-CTO 评分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Application of the J-CTO Score to Intraplaque Guidewire Tracking-Based Recanalization for In-Stent Chronic Total Occlusions
Background: The application of the J-CTO score for in-stent chronic total occlusion (CTO) recanalization remains unclear. We aimed to compare the role of J-CTO score in in-stent and de novo CTO interventions using intraplaque guidewire tracking techniques. Methods: The application of the J-CTO score to assess procedural feasibility and guidewire crossing time for in-stent (N=74, 14.6%) and de novo CTO (N=434, 85.4%) interventions was evaluated in consecutive 508 patients (64.1±11.6 years, 446 men). Failed intraplaque tracking (N=3) or guidewires crossing (N=35) was considered procedural failures (38/508=7.5%). Results: The procedural success rate for de novo CTOs significantly declined when the J-CTO score was >2 (85 vs. ≤2: 97%, p<0.001), but was comparable for in-stent CTOs (>2: 96 vs. ≤2: 100%, p=0.400). Among 470 patients with successful recanalization, the guidewire crossing time ≥30 minutes was required less for in-stent than for de novo CTOs (OR=0.40, 95% CI=0.18-0.86) with J-CTO score ≥2 in multivariate analysis. For those with successful antegrade-only wiring, the guidewire crossing time shown by Kaplan-Meier curves was significantly related to the J-CTO score for either in-stent (N=72) or de novo (N=370) CTOs (both p<0.001 by log-rank test). However, only blunt stump (15.0±5.6 min) and occlusion ≥20mm (16.2±5.6 min) were independent time-determining factors of guidewire crossing (both p<0.01) for in-stent CTOs. Conclusion: With the intraplaque tracking strategy, the effects of the J-CTO score on procedural feasibility and guidewire crossing time differ for in-stent and de novo CTOs. Therefore, the J-CTO score should be cautiously interpreted during in-stent CTO interventions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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