J-CTO评分在支架内慢性全闭塞再通中的应用。

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Chieh-Yu Chen, Chi-Hung Huang, Jen-Fang Cheng, Chien-Lin Lee, Jiun-Yang Chiang, Shih-Chi Liu, Chi-Jen Chang, Chia-Pin Lin, Cheng-Ting Tsai, Jun-Ting Liou, Chia-Ti Tsai, Yi-Chih Wang, Juey-Jen Hwang
{"title":"J-CTO评分在支架内慢性全闭塞再通中的应用。","authors":"Chieh-Yu Chen, Chi-Hung Huang, Jen-Fang Cheng, Chien-Lin Lee, Jiun-Yang Chiang, Shih-Chi Liu, Chi-Jen Chang, Chia-Pin Lin, Cheng-Ting Tsai, Jun-Ting Liou, Chia-Ti Tsai, Yi-Chih Wang, Juey-Jen Hwang","doi":"10.1016/j.amjcard.2025.09.034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>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 wiring-based intraplaque tracking techniques. 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 were 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%). The procedural success rate for de novo CTOs significantly declined when the J-CTO score was ≥3 (85 vs. ≤2: 97%, p<0.001), but was comparable for in-stent CTOs (≥3: 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. In conclusion, with the intraplaque guidewire tracking techniques, 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.</p>","PeriodicalId":7705,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Cardiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Application of the J-CTO Score to Recanalization for In-Stent Chronic Total Occlusions.\",\"authors\":\"Chieh-Yu Chen, Chi-Hung Huang, Jen-Fang Cheng, Chien-Lin Lee, Jiun-Yang Chiang, Shih-Chi Liu, Chi-Jen Chang, Chia-Pin Lin, Cheng-Ting Tsai, Jun-Ting Liou, Chia-Ti Tsai, Yi-Chih Wang, Juey-Jen Hwang\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.amjcard.2025.09.034\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>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 wiring-based intraplaque tracking techniques. 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 were 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%). The procedural success rate for de novo CTOs significantly declined when the J-CTO score was ≥3 (85 vs. ≤2: 97%, p<0.001), but was comparable for in-stent CTOs (≥3: 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. In conclusion, with the intraplaque guidewire tracking techniques, 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.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7705,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Cardiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Cardiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2025.09.034\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2025.09.034","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

J-CTO评分在支架内慢性全闭塞(CTO)再通中的应用尚不清楚。我们的目的是比较J-CTO评分在支架内和从头CTO干预中的作用,采用基于导线的斑块内跟踪技术。应用J-CTO评分评估支架内(N=74, 14.6%)和从头CTO (N=434, 85.4%)干预的程序可行性和导丝穿过时间,对连续508例患者(64.1±11.6年,男性446例)进行评估。斑块内追踪失败(N=3)或导丝穿过失败(N=35)被认为是程序性失败(38/508=7.5%)。当J-CTO评分≥3分时,新生CTOs的手术成功率显著下降(85 vs.≤2:97%,p
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 Recanalization for In-Stent Chronic Total Occlusions.

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 wiring-based intraplaque tracking techniques. 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 were 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%). The procedural success rate for de novo CTOs significantly declined when the J-CTO score was ≥3 (85 vs. ≤2: 97%, p<0.001), but was comparable for in-stent CTOs (≥3: 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. In conclusion, with the intraplaque guidewire tracking techniques, 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
American Journal of Cardiology
American Journal of Cardiology 医学-心血管系统
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
3.60%
发文量
698
审稿时长
33 days
期刊介绍: Published 24 times a year, The American Journal of Cardiology® is an independent journal designed for cardiovascular disease specialists and internists with a subspecialty in cardiology throughout the world. AJC is an independent, scientific, peer-reviewed journal of original articles that focus on the practical, clinical approach to the diagnosis and treatment of cardiovascular disease. AJC has one of the fastest acceptance to publication times in Cardiology. Features report on systemic hypertension, methodology, drugs, pacing, arrhythmia, preventive cardiology, congestive heart failure, valvular heart disease, congenital heart disease, and cardiomyopathy. Also included are editorials, readers'' comments, and symposia.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信