Abstract
Background Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with chronic total occlusion (CTO) is commonly performed despite unclear long-term benefits. The goal of this study was to evaluate the post-procedural outcome of patients with CTO intervention.
Methods The National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database, years 2016-2020, was studied using ICD 10 codes. Patients with CTO intervention were compared to patients without CTO. We evaluated post-procedural mortality and complications.
Results PCI in patients with CTO was associated with higher mortality and all post-procedural complications. A total of 2,011,854 patients underwent PCI with 259,574 having CTO. The CTO group had a 3.17% mortality rate vs 2.57% of non-CTO PCI. (OR, 1.24; CI:1.18–1.31; p<0.001). Using multivariate analysis adjusting for age, sex, race, diabetes mellitus, and chronic kidney disease, CTO PCI remained significantly associated with higher mortality (OR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.3 – 1.45; p<0.001). Patients with CTO compared to non-CTO PCI patients had higher rates of myocardial infarction (OR, 2.85; 95% CI, 2.54 – 3.21; p<0.001), coronary perforation (OR, 6.01; 95% CI, 5.25-6.89; p<0.001), tamponade (OR, 3.36; 95% CI, 2.91-3.88, p<0.001), contrast-induced nephropathy (OR, 2.05; 95% CI, 1.45-2.90), p<0.001), procedural bleeding (OR, 3.57; 95% CI, 3.27-3.89, p<0.001), and acute post-procedural respiratory failure (OR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.81-2.36, p<0.001). All post-procedural complications were more than 3 times the non-CTO patients (OR, 3.45; 95% CI, 3.24-3.67; p<0.001).
Conclusion Using a large national inpatient database, PCI performed in patients with CTO was associated with significantly much higher mortality and post-procedural complications compared to PCI in non-CTO patients.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
none
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
NIS data base publicly available without identifier
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Conflict of interest: None
Funding: None
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Subject Area
Reviews and Context
0
Comment
0
TRIP Peer Reviews
0
Community Reviews
0
Automated Services
0
Blogs/Media
Author Videos