Impact of Crossing Strategy on Intermediate-term Outcomes After Chronic Total Occlusion Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Abstract

BackgroundThere is ongoing controversy about the optimal crossing strategy selection for chronic total occlusion (CTO) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), especially regarding the relative merits of antegrade dissection/re-entry and the retrograde approach. MethodsWe retrospectively examined the clinical outcomes of 173 consecutive patients who underwent successful CTO PCI at our institution between January 2012 and March 2015. ResultsThe mean age was 65 ± 8 years, and 98% of the patients were men with a high prevalence of diabetes (60%), previous coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) (31%), and previous PCI (54%). The successful CTO crossing strategy was antegrade wire escalation in 79 patients (45.5%), antegrade dissection/re-entry in 58 patients (33.5%), retrograde wire escalation in 11 patients (6.4%), and retrograde dissection and re-entry in 25 patients (14.5%). The retrograde approach was more commonly used in lesions with interventional collaterals (P < 0.0001), moderate/severe calcification (P = 0.02), blunt stump (P = 0.01), and a higher Japan Chronic Total Occlusion score (P = 0.0002). Use of dissection and re-entry (both antegrade and retrograde) was associated with bifurcation and the distal cap (P = 0.004), longer CTO occlusion length (P < 0.0001), and longer stent length (P < 0.0001). Median follow-up was 11 months. The 12-month incidence of death, myocardial infarction, and the composite of acute coronary syndrome/target lesion revascularization/target vessel revascularization was 2.5%, 4.9%, and 24.4%, respectively, and was similar with intimal and subintimal crossing strategies. ConclusionsAntegrade dissection/re-entry and retrograde approaches are frequently used during CTO PCI and were associated with similarly favorable intermediate-term outcomes as antegrade wire escalation.