Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions · 2025
Contemporary Use of Coils During Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Insights From the Multicenter COILSEAL Registry.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНаблюдательное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Cerrato Enrico, Piedimonte Giulio, Franzino Marco, Marengo Giorgio, Bollati Mario, Zecchino Simone, Rutigliano David, Soriano Francesco, Leoncini Massimo, Mangione Riccardo, Sagazio Emanuele, Maiellaro Francesco, Jeva Francesco, Ussia Gian Paolo, Scudiero Fernando, Franzè Alfonso, Barbero Umberto, Calderone Dario, Nicolino Annamaria, Ugo Fabrizio, La Manna Alessio, Costa Francesco, Mazzarotto Pietro, Amat-Santos Ignacio Jt's, Varbella Ferdinando, CardioGroupVIII‐COILSEAL Study Group
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Use of coils during percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) is often life-saving and useful, although their off-label use according to the instructions for use.
AIMS: Evaluation of in-hospital and long-term outcomes of patients undergoing PCI with coil implantation for treating coronary perforation or closing coronary artery aneurysms/fistulas.
METHODS: Among 245,652 PCIs performed in 17 high-volume European centers, 143 patients (0.06%) undergoing coil implantation during PCI were finally included in the analysis. PCI strategy (coiling performed during coronary perforation vs. closing aneurysm/fistulas) and procedural devices used were collected. The primary outcome was technical success, defined as the successful sealing of coronary perforation or aneurysm/fistulas, and procedural success defined as technical success without in-hospital major cardiovascular events (MACE). Long-term MACE and mortality were also reported.
RESULTS: The primary outcome occurred in 95.7% of cases, with no significant differences observed between the perforation and aneurysm/fistulas groups (94.5% vs. 100%, p = 0.19). Patients in the perforation group had a significantly lower rate of procedural success (83.5% vs. 96.6%, p = 0.01). Target lesion failure occurred in 11.4% of cases without differences between groups at a median follow-up of 2 years.
CONCLUSIONS: Coils implantation during PCI is safe and feasible among patients treated for coronary perforations or closing aneurysms/fistulas.
AIMS: Evaluation of in-hospital and long-term outcomes of patients undergoing PCI with coil implantation for treating coronary perforation or closing coronary artery aneurysms/fistulas.
METHODS: Among 245,652 PCIs performed in 17 high-volume European centers, 143 patients (0.06%) undergoing coil implantation during PCI were finally included in the analysis. PCI strategy (coiling performed during coronary perforation vs. closing aneurysm/fistulas) and procedural devices used were collected. The primary outcome was technical success, defined as the successful sealing of coronary perforation or aneurysm/fistulas, and procedural success defined as technical success without in-hospital major cardiovascular events (MACE). Long-term MACE and mortality were also reported.
RESULTS: The primary outcome occurred in 95.7% of cases, with no significant differences observed between the perforation and aneurysm/fistulas groups (94.5% vs. 100%, p = 0.19). Patients in the perforation group had a significantly lower rate of procedural success (83.5% vs. 96.6%, p = 0.01). Target lesion failure occurred in 11.4% of cases without differences between groups at a median follow-up of 2 years.
CONCLUSIONS: Coils implantation during PCI is safe and feasible among patients treated for coronary perforations or closing aneurysms/fistulas.