Advertisement

Complications of Coronary Artery Interventions: Overview

  • Francesco Giannini
  • Antonio Colombo
Chapter

Abstract

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has the ability to relieve symptoms in chronic ischemic heart disease and alter the natural history of acute coronary syndromes. However, adverse procedural outcomes can occur as a direct result of the intervention itself. Knowledge of what complications can occur during PCI, and how to deal with them, is crucial for the practicing cardiologist and can mean the difference between life and death. In this chapter, we give a detailed outline of the typical complications in PCI and discuss the corresponding management.

References

  1. 1.
    Seshadri N, Whitlow PL, Acharya N, et al. Emergency coronary artery bypass surgery in the contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention era. Circulation. 2002;106:2346–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Yang EH, Gumina RJ, Lennon RJ, et al. Emergency coronary artery bypass surgery for percutaneous coronary interventions: changes in the incidence, clinical characteristics, and indications from 1979 to 2003. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;46:2004–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Venkitachalam L, Kip KE, Selzer F, et al. Twenty-year evolution of percutaneous coronary intervention and its impact on clinical outcomes: a report from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute-sponsored, multicenter 1985–1986 PTCA and 1997–2006 Dynamic Registries. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;2:6–13.PubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Huber MS, Mooney JF, Madison J, Mooney MR. Use of a morphologic classification to predict clinical outcome after dissection from coronary angioplasty. Am J Cardiol. 1991;68:467–71.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Klein L. Coronary complications of percutaneous coronary interventions: a practical approach to the management of abrupt closure. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2005;64:395–401.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    de Feyter PJ, de Jaegere PPT, Murphy ES, Serruys PW. Abrupt coronary artery occlusion during percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. Am Heart J. 1992;123:1633–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Durante A, Camici PG. Novel insight into an “old” phenomenon: the no reflow. Int J Cardiol. 2015;187:273–80.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Roffi, Patrono C, Collet JP, et al. 2015 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation: task force for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation of the European society of cardiology. Eur Heart J. 2016;37(3):267–315.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Amsterdam EA, Wenger NK, Brindis RG, et al. 2014 AHA/ACC guideline for the management of patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on practice guidelines. Circulation. 2014;130(25):2354–94.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Shimony A, Joseph L, Mottillo S, Eisenberg MJ. Coronary artery perforation during percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Can J Cardiol. 2011;27:843–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kinnaird T, Kwok CS, Kontopantelis E, et al. Incidence, determinants and outcomes of coronary perforation during percutaneous coronary intervention in the United Kingdom between 2006 and 2013. An analysis of 527121 cases from the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society Database. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9(8):e003449.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tarar MN, Christakopoulos GE, Brilakis ES. Successful management of a distal vessel perforation through a single 8-French guide catheter: combining balloon inflation for bleeding control with coil embolization. J Invasive Cardiol. 2013;25:486–91.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chen S, Lotan C, Jaffe R, et al. Pericardial covered stent for coronary perforations. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;86:400–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kiernan TJ, Yan BP, Ruggeiro N, et al. Coronary artery perforations in the contemporary interventional era. J Interv Cardiol. 2009;22:350–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fasseas P, Orford JL, Panetta CJ, et al. Incidence, correlates, management, and clinical outcome of coronary perforation: analysis of 16,298 procedures. Am Heart J. 2004;147:140–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bauer T, Boeder N, Nef HM, et al. Fate of patients with coronary perforation complicating percutaneous coronary intervention (from the Euro Heart Survey Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Registry). Am J Cardiol. 2015;116(9):1363–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ellis SG, Roubin GS, Kinh SB, et al. Angiographic and clinical predictors of acute closure after native vessel coronary angioplasty. Circulation. 1988;77:372–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dippel EJ, Kereiakes DJ, Tramuta DA, et al. Coronary perforation during percutaneous coronary intervention in the era of abciximab platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa blockade: an algorithm for percutaneous management. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2001;52:279–86.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Klein LW. Coronary artery perforation during interventional procedures. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2006;68(5):713–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ellis SG, Ajluni S, Arnold AZ, et al. Increased coronary perforation in the new device era. Incidence, classification, management, and outcome. Circulation. 1994;90:2725–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Javaid A, Buch AN, Satler LF, et al. Management and outcomes of coronary artery perforation during percutaneous coronary intervention. Am J Cardiol. 2006;98:911–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Shimony A, Zahger D, Van Straten M, et al. Incidence, risk factors, management and outcomes of coronary artery perforation during percutaneous coronary intervention. Am J Cardiol. 2009;104:1674–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Gruberg I, Pinnow E, Flood R, et al. Incidence, management, and outcome of coronary artery perforation during percutaneous coronary intervention. Am J Cardiol. 2000;86:680–2.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gunning MG, Williams IL, Jewitt DE, et al. Coronary artery perforation during percutaneous intervention: incidence and outcome. Heart. 2002;88:495–8.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Aj L, Yang Y-M, Khan Y, et al. Treatment of coronary artery perforations complicating percutaneous coronary intervention with a polytetrafluoroethylene-covered stent graft. Am J Cardiol. 2006;98:370–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fejka M, Dixon SR, Safian RD, et al. Diagnosis, management, and clinical outcome of cardiac tamponade complicating percutaneous coronary intervention. Am J Cardiol. 2002;90:1183–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ben-Gal Y, Weisz G, Collins MB, et al. Dual catheter technique for the treatment of severe coronary artery perforations. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;75:708–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Gaxiola E, Browne K. Coronary artery perforation repair using microcoil embolization. Catheter Cardiovasc Diagn. 1998;43:474–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Pravin KG. Delayed and repeated cardiac tampondade following microleak in RCA successfully treated with intra arterial sterile glue injection. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;73:797–800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Brilakis ES, Best PJM, Elesber AA, et al. Incidence, retrieval methods, and outcomes of stent loss during percutaneous coronary intervention. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2005;65:333–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Schatz R, Baim D, Leon M, et al. Clinical experience with the Palma-Schatz coronary stent. Initial results of a multicentre study. Circulation. 1991;83:148–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Alomar ME, Michael TT, Patel VG, et al. Stent loss and retrieval during percutaneous coronary interventions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Invasive Cardiol. 2013;25(12):637–41.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kammler J, Leisch F, Kerschner K, et al. Long-term follow-up in patients with lost coronary stent during interventional procedures. Am J Cardiol. 2006;98:367–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Bolte J, Neumann U, Pfafferott C, et al. Incidence, management, and outcome of stent loss during intracoronary stenting. Am J Cardiol. 2001;88:565–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Moussa I, Di Mario C, Moses J, et al. Coronary stenting after rotational atherectomy in calcified and complex lesions. Angiographic and clinical follow-up results. Circulation. 1997;96:128–36.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Safian RD, Feldman T, Muller DW, et al. Coronary angioplasty and Rotablator atherectomy trial (CARAT): immediate and late results of a prospective multicenter randomized trial. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2001;53:213–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Khattab AA, Otto A, Hochadel M, et al. Drug-eluting stents versus bare metal stents following rotational atherectomy for heavily calcified coronary lesions: late angiographic and clinical follow-up results. J Interv Cardiol. 2007;20:100–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Woodfield SL, Lopez A, Heuse RR. Fracture of coronary guidewire during rotational atherectomy with coronary perforation and tamponade. Catheter Cardiovasc Diagn. 1998;44:220–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Jain D, Kurowski V, Degenhardt M, et al. A rare, unreported complication during coronary rotational atherectomy. J Invasive Cardiol. 2000;12:428–30.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kaneda H, Saito S, Hosokawa G, et al. Trapped rotablator: kokesi phenomenon. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2000;49:82–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Grise MA, Yeager MJ, Teirstein PS. A case of entrapped rotational atherectomy burr. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2002;57:31–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Vroey FD, Velavan P, Jack SE, et al. How should I treat an entrapped rotational atherectomy burr. EuroIntervention. 2012;7:1238–44.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Sakara K, Ako J, Momomura SI. Successful removal of an entrapped rotablation burr by extracting drive shift sheath followed by balloon dilatation. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2011;78:567–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Prasan AM, Patel M, Pitney MR, et al. Disassembly of a rotablator: getting out of a trap. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2003;59(4):463–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Cunnington M, Egred M. GuideLiner, a child-in-a-mother catheter for successful retrieval of an entrapped rotablator burr. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2012;79(2):271–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Williams PD, Mamas MM, Morgan K, et al. Longitudinal stent deformation – a retrospective analysis of frequency and mechanisms. EuroIntervention. 2012;8(2):267–74.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Hanratty CG, Walsh SJ. Longitudinal compression: a “new” complication with model coronary stent platforms – a time to think beyond deliverability. EuroIntervention. 2011;7(7):872–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Kereiakes DJ, Popma JJ, Cannon LA, et al. Longitudinal stent deformation: quantitative coronary angiographic analysis from the PERSEUS and PLATINUM randomised controlled clinical trials. EuroIntervention. 2012;8:187–95.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Ormiston JA, Webber B, Webster MWI. Stent longitudinal integrity – bench insights into a clinical problem. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2011;4(12):1310–7.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Arnous S, Shakhshir N, Wiper A, et al. Incidence and mechanisms of longitudinal stent deformation associated with biomatrix, resolute, element, and xience stents: angiographic and case-by-case review of 1,800 PCIs. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;86:1002–11.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Ndrepepa G, Braun S, Cassese S, et al. Prognostic value of high-sensitivity troponin T after percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with stable coronary artery disease. Rev Esp Cardiol. 2016;69:746–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Moussa ID, Klein LW, Shah B, et al. Consideration of a new definition of clinically relevant myocardial infarction after coronary revascularization: an expert consensus document from the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;62:1563–70.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Ross MJ, Herrmann HC, Moliterno DJ, et al. Angiographic variables predict increased risk for adverse ischemic events after coronary stenting with glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibition: results from the TARGET trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003;42:981–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Park DW, Kim YH, Yun SC, et al. Impact of the angiographic mechanisms underlying periprocedural myocardial infarction after drug-eluting stent implantation. Am J Cardiol. 2014;113:1105–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Selvanayagam JB, Porto I, Channon K, et al. Troponin elevation after percutaneous coronary intervention directly represents the extent of irreversible myocardial injury: insights from cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging. Circulation. 2005;111:1027–32.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Porto I, Selvanayagam JB, Van Gaal WJ, et al. Plaque volume and occurrence and location of periprocedural myocardial necrosis after percutaneous coronary intervention: insights from delayed-enhancement magnetic resonance imaging, thrombolysis in myocardial infarction myocardial perfusion grade analysis, and intravascular ultrasound. Circulation. 2006;114:662–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Steinhubl SR, Berger PB, Brennan DM, et al. Optimal timing for the initiation of pre-treatment with 300 mg clopidogrel before percutaneous coronary intervention. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;47:939–43.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Lotrionte M, Biondi-Zoccai GG, Agostoni P, et al. Meta-analysis appraising high clopidogrel loading in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Am J Cardiol. 2007;100:1199–206.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Morrow DA, Wiviott SD, White HD, et al. Effect of the novel thienopyridine prasugrel compared with clopidogrel on spontaneous and procedural myocardial infarction in the trial to assess improvement in therapeutic outcomes by optimizing platelet inhibition with prasugrel-thrombolysis in myocardial infarction 38: an application of the classification system from the universal definition of myocardial infarction. Circulation. 2009;119:2758–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Steg PG, Bhatt DL, Hamm CW, et al. Effect of cangrelor on periprocedural outcomes in percutaneous coronary interventions: a pooled analysis of patient-level data. Lancet. 2013;382:1981–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Abtan J, Steg PG, Stone GW, et al. Efficacy and safety of cangrelor in preventing periprocedural complications in patients with stable angina and acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. The CHAMPION PHOENIX trial. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2016;9:1905–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Jeong YH, Lee SW, Choi BR, et al. Randomized comparison of adjunctive cilostazol versus high maintenance dose clopidogrel in patients with high post-treatment platelet reactivity: results of the ACCEL-RESISTANCE (adjunctive cilostazol versus high maintenance dose clopidogrel in patients with clopidogrel resistance) randomized study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;53:1101–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Lee SW, Park SW, Hong MK, et al. Triple versus dual antiplatelet therapy after coronary stenting: impact on stent thrombosis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;46:1833–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Kushner FG, Hand M, Smith SC Jr, et al. 2009 focused updates: ACC/AHA guidelines for the management of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (updating the 2004 guideline and 2007 focused update) and ACC/AHA/SCAI guidelines on percutaneous coronary intervention (updating the 2005 guideline and 2007 focused update): a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association task force on practice guidelines. Circulation. 2009;120:2271–306.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Zhai C, Cong H, Liu Y, et al. Effect of high-dose statin pretreatment on the incidence of periprocedural myocardial infarction in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: grading the evidence through a cumulative meta-analysis. Clin Cardiol. 2015;38(11):668–78.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Patti G, Chello M, Pasceri V, et al. Protection from procedural myocardial injury by atorvastatin is associated with lower levels of adhesion molecules after percutaneous coronary intervention: results from the ARMYDA-CAMs (Atorvastatin for Reduction of MYocardil Damage during Angioplasty-Cell Adhesion Molecules) substudy. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;48:1560–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Baim DS, WahrD GB, et al. Randomized trial of a distal embolic protection device during percutaneous intervention of saphenous vein aorto-coronary bypass grafts. Circulation. 2002;105:1285–90.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Stone GW, Webb J, Cox DA, et al. Distal microcirculatory protection during percutaneous coronary intervention in acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2005;293:1063–72.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Gick M, Jander N, Bestehorn H-P, et al. Randomized evaluation of effects of filter-based distal protection on myocardial perfusion and infarct size after primary percutaneous catheter intervention in myocardial infarction with and without ST-segment elevation. Circulation. 2005;112:1462–9.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Rezkalla SH, Kloner RA. No-reflow phenomenon. Circulation. 2002;105:656–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Abbo KM, Dooris M, Glazier S, et al. Features and outcome of no-reflow after percutaneous coronary intervention. Am J Cardiol. 1995;75:778–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Piana R, Paik G, Moscucci M, et al. Incidence and treatment of “no-reflow” after percutaneous coronary intervention. Circulation. 1994;89:2514–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Yip HK, Chen MC, Chang HW, et al. Angiographic morphologic features of infarct-related arteries and timely reperfusion in acute myocardial infarction: predictors of slow-flow and no-reflow. Chest. 2002;122:1322–32.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Kojima S, Sakamoto T, Ishihara M, et al. The white blood cell count is an independent predictor of no-reflow and mortality following acute myocardial infarction in the coronary interventional area. Ann Med. 2004;36:153–60.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Iwakura K, Ito H, Kawano S, et al. Predictive factors for development of the no-reflow phenomenon in patients with reperfused anterior wall acute myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001;38:472–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Micari A, Belcik TA, Balcells EA, et al. Improvement in microvascular reflowand reduction of infarct size with adenosine in patients undergoing primary coronary stenting. Am J Cardiol. 2005;96:1410–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Kunadian V, Zorkun C, Williams SP, et al. Intracoronary pharmacotherapy in themanagement of coronarymicrovascular dysfunction. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2008;26:234–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Ito H, Taniyama Y, Iwakura K, et al. Intravenous nicorandil can preserve microvascular integrity and myocardial viability in patients with reperfused anterior wall myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999;33:654–60.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Rezkalla SH, Dharmashankar KC, Abdalrahman IB. No-reflow phenomenon following percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction: incidence, outcome and effect of pharmacologic therapy. J Interv Cardiol. 2010;23:429–43.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Su Q, Li L, Liu Y, et al. Short-term effect of verapamil on coronary no-reflow associated with percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute coronary syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Clin Cardiol. 2013;36(8):E11–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Montalescot G, Barragan P, Wittenberg O, et al. Platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibition with coronary stenting for acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 2001;344:1895–903.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Stone GW, Maehara A, Witzenbichler B, et al. Intracoronary abciximab and aspiration thrombectomy in patients with large anterior myocardial infarction: the INFUSE-AMI randomized trial. JAMA. 2012;307:1817–26.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Svilaas T, Vlaar PJ, van der Horst IC, et al. Thrombus aspiration during primary percutaneous coronary intervention. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:557–67.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Vlaar PJ, Svilaas T, van der Horst IC, et al. Cardiac death and reinfarction after 1 year in the Thrombus Aspiration during Percutaneous coronary intervention in Acute myocardial infarction Study (TAPAS): a 1-year follow-up study. Lancet. 2008;371:1915–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Frobert O, Lagerqvist B, Olivecrona GK, et al. Thrombus aspiration during ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 2013;369:1587–97.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Stone GW, Moses JW, Ellis SG, et al. Safety and efficacy of sirolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting coronary stents. N Engl J Med. 2007;356:998.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Aoki J, Landsky AJ, Mehran R, et al. Early stent thrombosis in patientswith acute coronary syndrome treated with drug-eluting and bare metal stents: the Acute Catheterization and Urgent Intervention Triage Strategy trial. Circulation. 2009;119:687–98.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Choi SY, Witzenbichler B, Maehara A, et al. Intravascular ultrasound findings of early stent thrombosis after primary percutaneous intervention in acute myocardial infarction: a Harmonizing Outcomes with Revascularization and Stent in Acute Myocardial Infarction (HORIZONS-AMI) substudy. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2011;4:239–47.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Nakano M, Yahagi K, Otsuka F, et al. Causes of early stent thrombosis in patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome: an ex vivo human autopsy study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63:2510–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Ge L, Airoldi F, Iakovou I, et al. Clinical and angiographic outcome after implantation of drug-eluting stents in bifurcation lesions with the crush stent technique: importance of final kissing balloon post-dilation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;46:613–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Iakovou I, Schmidt T, Bonizzoni E, et al. Incidence, predictors and outcome of thrombosis after successful implantation of drug-eluting stents. JAMA. 2005;293:2126–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Genereux P, Stone GW, Harrington RA, et al. Impact of intraprocedural stent thrombosis during percutaneous coronary interventions: insights from the CHAMPION PHOENIX trial (clinical trial comparing cangrelor to clopidogrel standard of care therapy in subjects who require percutaneous coronary intervention). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63:619–29.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Bhatt DL, Lincoff AM, Gibson CM, et al. Intravenous platelet blockade with cangrelor during PCI. N Engl J Med. 2009;361(24):2330–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Stone GW, Witzenbichler B, Guagliumi G, et al. Bivalirudin during primary PCI in acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 2008;358(21):2218–30.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Steg PG, Van’t Hof A, Hamm CW, et al. Bivalirudin started during emergency 59 transport for primary PCI. N Engl J Med. 2013;369(23):2207–17.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Brener SJ, Cristea E, Kirtane AJ, et al. Intra-procedural stent thrombosis: a new risk factor for adverse outcomes in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for acute coronary syndromes. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;6(1):36–43.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Suh J, Park DW, Lee JY, et al. The relationshipand threshold of stent length with regard to risk of stent thrombosis after drug-eluting stent implantation. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2010;3(4):383–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Amin AP, Marso SP, Rao SV, et al. Cost-effectiveness of targeting patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for therapy with bivalirudin versus heparin monotherapy according to predicted risk of bleeding. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2010;3:358–65.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Eleid MF, Rihal CS, Gulati R, et al. Systematic use of transradial PCI in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a call to “arms”. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2013;6:1145–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Kwok CS, Rao SV, Myint PK, et al. Major bleeding after percutaneous coronary intervention and risk of subsequent mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Open Heart. 2014;1:e000021.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Mamas MA, Anderson SG, Carr M, et al., British Cardiovascular Intervention Society and the National Institute for Cardiovascular Outcomes Research. Baseline bleeding risk and arterial access site practice in relation to procedural outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64:1554–64.Google Scholar
  102. 102.
    Chhatriwalla AK, Amin AP, Kennedy KF, et al. National Cardiovascular Data Registry. Association between bleeding events and in-hospital mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention. JAMA. 2013;309:1022–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Mehran R, Rao SV, Bhatt DL, et al. Standardized bleeding definitions for cardiovascular clinical trials: a consensus report from the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium. Circulation. 2011;123:2736–47.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Ndrepepa G, Schuster T, Hadamitzky M, et al. Validation of the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium definition of bleeding in patients with coronary artery disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Circulation. 2012;125:1424–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Vranckx P, Leonardi S, Tebaldi M, et al. Prospective validation of the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium classification in the all-comer PRODIGY trial. Eur Heart J. 2014;35:2524.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Bovill EG, Terrin ML, Stump DC, et al. Hemorrhagic events during therapy with recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator, heparin, and aspirin for acute myocardial infarction. Results of the thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI), phase II trial. Ann Intern Med. 1991;115:256–65.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Sabatine MS, Morrow DA, Giugliano RP, et al. Association of hemoglobin levels with clinical outcomes in acute coronary syndromes. Circulation. 2005;111:2042–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Rao SV, McCoy LA, Spertus JA, et al. An updated bleeding model to predict the risk of post-procedure bleeding among patients under-going percutaneous coronary intervention: a report using an expanded bleeding definition from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry CathPCI Registry. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2013;6:897–904.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    Feit F, Voeltz MD, Attubato MJ, et al. Predictors and impact of major hemorrhage on mortality following percutaneous coronary intervention from the REPLACE-2 trial. Am J Cardiol. 2007;100:1364–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Kinnaird TD, Stabile E, Mintz GS, et al. Incidence, predictors, and prognostic implications of bleeding and blood transfusion following percutaneous coronary interventions. Am J Cardiol. 2003;92:930–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. 111.
    Doyle BJ, Ting HH, Bell MR, et al. Major femoral bleeding complications after percutaneous coronary intervention: incidence, predictors, and impact on long-term survival among 17,901 patients treated at the Mayo Clinic from 1994 to 2005. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2008;1:202–9.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. 112.
    Marso SP, Amin AP, House JA, et al. Association between use of bleeding avoidance strategies and risk of periprocedural bleeding among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. JAMA. 2010;303:2156–64.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. 113.
    Jolly SS, Yusuf S, Cairns J, et al. Radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography and intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes (RIVAL): a randomised, parallel group, multicentre trial. Lancet. 2011;377:1409–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    Baklanov DV, Kim S, Marso SP, et al. Comparison of bivalirudin and radial access across a spectrum of preprocedural risk of bleeding in percutaneous coronary intervention: analysis from the national cardiovascular data registry. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;6:347–53.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. 115.
    Rao SV, Dai D, Subherwal S, et al. Association between periprocedural bleeding and long-term outcomes following percutaneous coronary intervention in older patients. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2012;5:958–65.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. 116.
    Steg PG, Huber K, Andreotti F, et al. Bleeding in acute coronary syndromes and percutaneous coronary interventions: position paper by the Working Group on Thrombosis of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J. 2011;32:1854–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. 117.
    Pellaton C, Cayla G, Silvain J, et al. Incidence and consequence of major bleeding in primary percutaneous intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction in the era of radial access: an analysis of the international randomized acute myocardial infarction treated with primary angioplasty and intravenous enoxaparin or unfractionated heparin to lower ischemic and bleeding events at short- and long-term follow-up trial. Am Heart J. 2015;170:778–86.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. 118.
    Lip GY, Huber K, Andreotti F, et al. Management of antithrombotic therapy in atrial fibrillation patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome and/or undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention/stenting. Thromb Haemost. 2010;103:13–28.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. 119.
    Manoukian SV, Voeltz MD, Eikelboom J. Bleeding complications in acute coronary syndromes and percutaneous coronary interventions: predictors, prognostic significance, and paradigms for reducing risk. Clin Cardiol. 2007;30(10 Suppl 2):II24–34.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  120. 120.
    Yatskar L, Selzer F, Feit F, et al. Access site hematoma requiring blood transfusion predicts mortality in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: data from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Dynamic Registry. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2007;69:961–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. 121.
    Kim P, Dixon S, Eisenbrey AB, et al. Impact of acute blood loss anemia and red blood cell transfusion on mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention. Clin Cardiol. 2007;30:II35–43.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  122. 122.
    Mehran R, Pocock S, Nikolsky E, et al. Impact of bleeding on mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention results from a patient-level pooled analysis of the REPLACE-2 (randomized evaluation of PCI linking angiomax to reduced clinical events), ACUITY (acute catheterization and urgent intervention triage strategy), and HORIZONS-AMI (harmonizing outcomes with revascularization and stents in acute myocardial infarction) trials. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2011;4:654–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. 123.
    Daugherty SL, Thompson LE, Kim S, et al. Patterns of use and comparative effectiveness of bleeding avoidance strategies in men and women following percutaneous coronary interventions: an observational study from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61:2070–8.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. 124.
    Louvard Y, Benamer H, Garot P, et al. Comparison of transradial and transfemoral approaches for coronary angiography and angioplasty in octogenarians (the OCTOPLUS study). Am J Cardiol. 2004;94:1177–80.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. 125.
    Pristipino C, Trani C, Nazzaro MS, et al. Major improvement of percutaneous cardiovascular procedure outcomes with radial artery catheterisation: results from the PREVAIL study. Heart. 2009;95:476–82.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. 126.
    Mamas MA, Anderson SG, Carr M, et al. Baseline bleeding risk and arterial access site practice in relation to procedural outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64:1554–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. 127.
    Koreny M, Riedmüller E, Nikfardjam M, et al. Arterial puncture closing devices compared with standard manual compression after cardiac catheterization: systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA. 2004;291:350–7.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. 128.
    Ellis SG, Bhatt D, Kapadia S, et al. Correlates and outcomes of retroperitoneal hemorrhage complicating percutaneous coronary intervention. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2006;67:541.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. 129.
    Silva JA, White CJ, Quintana H, et al. Percutaneous revascularization of the common femoral artery for limb ischemia. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2004;62:230–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. 130.
    Ahmad F, Turner SA, Torrie P, Gibson M. Iatrogenic femoral artery pseudoaneurysms – a review of current methods of diagnosis and treatment. Clin Radiol. 2008;63(12):1310–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  131. 131.
    Lumsden AB, Miller JM, Kosinski AS, et al. A prospective evaluation of surgically treated groin complications following percutaneous cardiac procedures. Am Surg. 1994;60:132–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  132. 132.
    Silva JA, Stant J, Ramee SR. Endovascular treatment of a massive retroperitoneal bleeding: successful balloon-catheter delivery of intra-arterial thrombin. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2005;64:218–22.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. 133.
    Hou SH, Bushinsky DA, Wish JB, Cohen JJ, Harrington JT. Hospital-acquired renal insufficiency: a prospective study. Am J Med. 1983;74:243–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. 134.
    Thomsen HS. Guidelines for contrast media from the European Society of Urogenital Radiology. Am J Roentgenol. 2003;181:1463–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. 135.
    Solomon RJ, Mehran R, Natarajan MK, et al. Contrast-induced nephropathy and long-term adverse events: cause and effect? Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2009;4:1162–9.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  136. 136.
    Weisbord SD, Chen H, Stone RA, et al. Associations of increases in serum creatinine with mortality and length of hospital stay after coronary angiography. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2006;17:2871–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. 137.
    McCullough PA. Contrast-induced acute kidney injury. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;51(15):1419–28.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. 138.
    Fliser D, Laville M, Covic A, et al. A European Renal Best Practice (ERBP) position statement on the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) clinical practice guidelines on acute kidney injury: part 1: definitions, conservative management and contrast-induced nephropathy. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2012;27(12):4263–72.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. 139.
    Solomon R, Deray G. How to prevent contrast-induced nephropathy and manage risk patients: practical recommendations. Kidney Int Suppl. 2006;100:S51–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. 140.
    Amin AP, Salisbury AC, McCullough PA, et al. Trends in the incidence of acute kidney injury in patients hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction. Arch Intern Med. 2012;172:246–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  141. 141.
    Tsai TT, Patel UD, Chang TI, et al. Contemporary incidence, predictors, and outcomes of acute kidney injury in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions: insights from the NCDR Cath-PCI Registry. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2014;7:1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  142. 142.
    Finn WF. The clinical and renal consequences of contrast-induced nephropathy. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2006;21:i2–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  143. 143.
    McCullough PA, Wolyn R, Rocher LL, et al. Acute renal failure after coronary intervention: incidence, risk factors, and relationship to mortality. Am J Med. 1997;103:368–75.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  144. 144.
    Levy EM, Viscoli CM, Horwitz RI. The effect of acute renal failure on mortality. A cohort analysis. JAMA. 1996;275:1489–94.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  145. 145.
    Gruberg L, Mintz GS, Mehran R, et al. The prognostic implications of further renal function deterioration within 48 h of interventional coronary procedures in patients with pre-existent chronic renal insufficiency. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2000;36:1542–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  146. 146.
    McCullough PA, Choi JP, Feghali GA, et al. Contrast-induced acute kidney injury. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;68:1465–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  147. 147.
    Mehran R, Aymong ED, Nikolsky E, et al. A simple risk score for prediction of contrast-induced nephropathy after percutaneous coronary intervention: development and initial validation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;44:1393–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  148. 148.
    Maioli M, Toso A, Gallopin M, et al. Preprocedural score for risk of contrast-induced nephropathy in elective coronary angiography and intervention. J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown). 2010;11:444–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  149. 149.
    Solomon R, Gordon P, Manoukian SV, et al., BOSS Trial Investigators. Randomized trial of bicarbonate or saline study for the prevention of contrast-induced nephropathy in patients with CKD. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2015;10:1519–24.Google Scholar
  150. 150.
    Brar SS, Shen AY, Jorgensen MB, et al. Sodium bicarbonate vs sodium chloride for the prevention of contrast medium-induced nephropathy in patients undergoing coronary angiography: a randomized trial. JAMA. 2008;300:1038–46.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  151. 151.
    Li Y, Liu Y, Fu L, et al. Efficacy of short- term high-dose statin in preventing contrast-induced nephropathy: a meta-analysis of seven randomized controlled trials. PLoS One. 2012;7:e34450.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  152. 152.
    Leoncini M, Toso A, Maioli M, et al. Early high-dose rosuvastatin for contrast-induced nephropathy prevention in acute coronary syndrome: results from the PRATO-ACS Study (protective effect of rosuvastatin and antiplatelet therapy on contrast-induced acute kidney injury and myocardial damage in patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63:71–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  153. 153.
    Han Y, Zhu G, Han L, et al. Short-term rosuvastatin therapy for prevention of contrast-induced acute kidney injury in patients with diabetes and chronic kidney disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63:62–70.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  154. 154.
    Sadat U, Usman A, Gillard JH, et al. Does ascorbic acid protect against contrast-induced acute kidney injury in patients undergoing coronary angiography: a systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;62:2167–75.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  155. 155.
    Subramaniam RM, Suarez-Cuervo C, Wilson RF, et al. Effectiveness of prevention strategies for contrast-induced nephropathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2016;164:406–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  156. 156.
    Briguori C. Renalguard system: a dedicated device to prevent contrast-induced acute kidney injury. Int J Cardiol. 2013;168(2):643–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  157. 157.
    Briguori C, Visconti G, Donahue M, et al. RenalGuard system in high-risk patients for contrast-induced acute kidney injury. Am Heart J. 2016;173:67–76.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  158. 158.
    Usmiani T, Andreis A, Budano C, et al. AKIGUARD (Acute Kidney Injury GUARding Device) trial: in-hospital and one-year outcomes. J Cardiovasc Med. 2016;17(7):530–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  159. 159.
    Windecker S, Kolh P, Alfonso F, et al., Authors/Task Force Members. 2014 ESC/EACTS guidelines on myocardial revascularization: the task force on myocardial revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) developed with the special contribution of the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI). Eur Heart J. 2014;35:2541–619.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Interventional Cardiology Unit, San Raffaele Scientific InstituteMilanItaly
  2. 2.Interventional Cardiology Unit, EMO-GVM Centro Cuore ColumbusMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations