Improving Success Rates of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Chronic Total Occlusion at a Rural Hospital in East Taiwan

Wang, Kuang-Te; Chen, Chun‐Yen; Chen, Yun-Tzy; Tsai, Jui‐Peng; Lin, Wei; Cheng, Hsiao-Yang; Yeh, Hung‐I; Hou, Charles Jia‐Yin

doi:10.1016/j.ijge.2013.12.004

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It has been used as the standard and conventional diagnostic method of CAD ever since because of the reproducible visualization of CAD and it’s severity on angiographic images obtained during direct injection of contrast agent into the coronary arteries [ 16 ]. To the growing evidence from the physicians’ observations, several changes have been made to the initial ICA, including obtaining digital images, reducing the contrast volume and the number of wires used, and developing quantitative measurements, which have resulted in more accurate images, fewer complications, higher success rates, and reduced procedural time [ 16 , 17 ].…”

Section: Conventional Invasive Coronary Angiography (Ica)/ Percutaneo...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Is it the Time to Move Towards Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography-Derived Fractional Flow Reserve Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention? The Pros and Cons

Sharifkazemi

Hooshanginezhad

Zoroufian

et al. 2023

CCR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Coronary artery disease is the leading cause of mortality worldwide. Diagnosis is conventionally performed by direct visualization of the arteries by invasive coronary angiography (ICA), which has inherent limitations and risks. Measurement of fractional flow reserve (FFR) has been suggested for a more accurate assessment of ischemia in the coronary artery with high accuracy for determining the severity and decision on the necessity of intervention. Nevertheless, invasive coronary angiography-derived fractional flow reserve (ICA-FFR) is currently used in less than one-third of clinical practices because of the invasive nature of ICA and the need for additional equipment and experience, as well as the cost and extra time needed for the procedure. Recent technical advances have moved towards non-invasive high-quality imaging modalities, such as magnetic resonance, single-photon emission computed tomography, and coronary computed tomography (CT) scan; however, none had a definitive modality to confirm hemodynamically significant coronary artery stenosis. Coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) can provide accurate anatomic and hemodynamic data about the coronary lesion, especially calculating fractional flow reserve derived from CCTA (CCTA-FFR). Although growing evidence has been published regarding CCTA-FFR results being comparable to ICA-FFR, CCTA-FFR has not yet replaced the invasive conventional angiography, pending additional studies to validate the advantages and disadvantages of each diagnostic method. Furthermore, it has to be identified whether revascularization of a stenotic lesion is plausible based on CCTA-FFR and if the therapeutic plan can be determined safely and accurately without confirmation from invasive methods. Therefore, in the present review, we will outline the pros and cons of using CCTA-FFR vs. ICA-FFR regarding diagnostic accuracy and treatment decision-making.

show abstract

Section: Conventional Invasive Coronary Angiography (Ica)/ Percutaneo...mentioning

confidence: 99%