Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions · 2024
Heparin Reversal for Coronary Artery Perforation.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Sawayama Yuichi, Sasaki Kenta, Taninobu Narumi, Ikuta Akihiro, Osakada Kohei, Kubo Shunsuke, Tada Takeshi, Fuku Yasushi, Tanaka Hiroyuki, Nakagawa Yoshihisa, Kadota Kazushige
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Reversing heparin when managing coronary artery perforation (CAP) during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) can provide hemostasis but may cause coronary thrombosis if a device is still present in a coronary artery.
AIMS: To assess the impact of heparin reversal while an intracoronary artery device is in place for CAP.
METHODS: This study analyzed CAP cases during PCI from January 2006 to October 2023. Patients were grouped according to implementing heparin reversal while an intracoronary artery device was in place. The safety outcome was coronary thrombosis after CAP. The efficacy outcomes were successful hemostasis and death from any cause.
RESULTS: CAP occurred in 368 of 22,368 cases (1.6%). Patients who had heparin reversal with a device in place comprised 211 (57%). Among these, coronary thrombosis occurred in 16 (7.6%). An activated clotting time (ACT) 〈150 seconds was significantly correlated with coronary thrombosis. Heparin reversal with a device in place was significantly associated with successful hemostasis (heparin reversal 91% vs. no heparin reversal 73%; adjusted odds ratio 2.78; 95% confidence interval 1.27-6.13; p = 0.011), but was not different for death from any cause (heparin reversal 4.3% vs. no heparin reversal 5.7%; adjusted odds ratio 0.97; 95% confidence interval 0.28-3.43; p = 0.964).
CONCLUSION: Heparin reversal with a device in place was associated with an increased risk of coronary thrombosis when ACT was less than 150 seconds. While it may not have a substantial association with a reduced risk of mortality, it offers an advantage in achieving successful hemostasis.
AIMS: To assess the impact of heparin reversal while an intracoronary artery device is in place for CAP.
METHODS: This study analyzed CAP cases during PCI from January 2006 to October 2023. Patients were grouped according to implementing heparin reversal while an intracoronary artery device was in place. The safety outcome was coronary thrombosis after CAP. The efficacy outcomes were successful hemostasis and death from any cause.
RESULTS: CAP occurred in 368 of 22,368 cases (1.6%). Patients who had heparin reversal with a device in place comprised 211 (57%). Among these, coronary thrombosis occurred in 16 (7.6%). An activated clotting time (ACT) 〈150 seconds was significantly correlated with coronary thrombosis. Heparin reversal with a device in place was significantly associated with successful hemostasis (heparin reversal 91% vs. no heparin reversal 73%; adjusted odds ratio 2.78; 95% confidence interval 1.27-6.13; p = 0.011), but was not different for death from any cause (heparin reversal 4.3% vs. no heparin reversal 5.7%; adjusted odds ratio 0.97; 95% confidence interval 0.28-3.43; p = 0.964).
CONCLUSION: Heparin reversal with a device in place was associated with an increased risk of coronary thrombosis when ACT was less than 150 seconds. While it may not have a substantial association with a reduced risk of mortality, it offers an advantage in achieving successful hemostasis.