冠状动脉介入治疗右冠状动脉肺动脉瘘并发右冠状动脉狭窄1例

患者,男,76岁,主诉因反复心前区憋闷10余年加重伴发作性心前区疼痛1周入院.有吸烟史20年,20支/d,高血压史10余年,最高血压为220/100mmHg(1 mmHg=0.133 kPa).入院体检:血压130/70 mmHg,双肺呼吸音清,心率70次/min,心律齐,未及杂音.下肢不水肿.心电图Ⅰ、aVL、V4～6导联T波倒置.空腹血糖5.1 mmol/L,TC 4.25mmol/L,TG 0.67 mmol/L,LDL 2.54 mmol/L,D-二聚体0.1 mg/L(正常＜0.3 mg/L).心动超声:左室肥厚,主动脉瓣少量反流,左室射血分数(LVEF)60%.     

内皮素与经皮冠状动脉介入治疗后再狭窄的研究进展

经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(percutaneous coronary intervention,PCI)是目前心脏病应用最广泛的介入技术.自1979年Gruentzig等完成首例经皮冠状动脉成行术(percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty,PTCA)以来,这项技术发展迅猛,已成为目前冠心病血运重建治疗的重要手段.     

冠状动脉小血管病变的介入治疗

冠状动脉小血管病变 (下称小血管病变 )十分常见 ,约占全部冠状动脉介入治疗 (PCI)病变的 4 7% ;同时 ,小血管病变的 PCI操作难度大 ,技术要求高 ,成功率低 ,容易发生急性并发症 ,再狭窄率高 ,远期疗效差。因此 ,做好小血管病变的 PCI有着重要的临床意义。1　小血管病变的定义及相关因素小血管病变是指通过定量冠状动脉造影 (QCA )确定的参照血管直径 <3m m(或 <2 .7mm)的病变。血管直径的大小与许多因素有关 ,通常情况下 ,西方人的血管大于亚洲人 ,男性血管较女性血管大 ,体表面积小者血管直径较小 ,糖尿病患者的血管内径较小 ,所有这…     

冠状动脉介入治疗致冠状动脉夹层一例

患者,男性,41岁.活动后胸闷憋喘4～5天入院.既往有高血压病史,不吸烟.入院体格检查：Bp 192/140 mmHg,双肺呼吸音粗,未闻及干湿性罗音,心率104次/分,心律齐,双下肢无水肿.心电图检查示窦性心动过速.心脏彩超检查示：左心房44 mm,右心房50 mm,右心室29 mm,左心室56 mm,左心室射血分数45％,中度肺动脉高压,少量心包积液.     

经桡动脉途径介入治疗在冠状动脉完全闭塞性病变中的应用

目的 探讨经桡动脉途径行冠状动脉介入术（PCI）治疗冠状动脉完全闭塞性（CTO）病变的效果及安全性。方法对130例（共142支靶血管）CTO患者经桡动脉途径行冠状动脉造影（SCA）及PCI治疗。观察不同特征靶血管手术成功率及围手术期并发症情况。结果98例（75．O％）成功完成冠状动脉内支架植入术（PTCA）,CTO靶血管闭塞长度≤20mm、病变角度≤45°、元或仅有微量桥侧支存在、无钙化、闭塞残端呈鼠尾状及闭塞时间≤12个月者的PCI成功率较高;均未发生严重手术并发症,无不良心脏事件。结论经皮桡动脉途径行PCI治疗CTO成功率高,且创伤小、易于压迫止血、并发症少,患者依从性好。     

冠状动脉狭窄血流动力学的定量测定

冠状动脉狭窄严重度的估计关系到临床治疗方式的决择和预后判断的依据。传统的冠脉造影按直径狭窄百分比分级脱离了解剖与生理联系，低估了弥漫性冠脉血管病变的程度。近年来多年新的交叉性检测技术从静态与动态，平面与立体分析模式加强了冠脉狭窄解剖与功能联系，形成了多方位定量评价冠脉狭窄血动学的新格局。数字化技术和数学模型的建立则增加了各探测手段的效能，精度与速度。     

老年冠状动脉狭窄与脑血管狭窄的相关性

目的探讨心脑血管疾病患者冠状动脉狭窄与脑血管狭窄的相关性。方法对冠心病/脑血管病患者或心脑血管疾病可疑患者进行冠状动脉造影(CAG)及数字减影全脑血管造影(DSA)检查,分析其联合诊断心脑血管病变的情况。结果 (1)冠状动脉狭窄与脑血管狭窄的发生存在一致性,且随着冠状动脉狭窄支数的增加,脑血管狭窄的发生率逐步增加;(2)冠状动脉狭窄支数与脑血管狭窄数量存在正相关;(3)随着冠状动脉狭窄支数的增加,脑血管狭窄发生风险增加。结论冠状动脉狭窄发生及程度与脑血管狭窄一致,早期对冠状动脉狭窄的患者进行脑血管的检查、进行针对性治疗十分必要。     

冠状动脉分叉病变的介入治疗

临床上冠状动脉分叉病变占冠状动脉介入治疗的15％～20％，一直是该治疗领域的难点。进入药物支架时代，新器械的发明和新技术的应用显著降低了急性并发症及中、远期的靶血管重建率、再狭窄率。该文简要介绍分叉病变的介入治疗现状。     

冠状动脉分叉病变的介入治疗

临床上冠状动脉分叉病变占冠状动脉介入治疗的15%～20%,一直是该治疗领域的难点.进入药物支架时代,新器械的发明和新技术的应用显著降低了急性并发症及中、远期的靶血管重建率、再狭窄率.该文简要介绍分叉病变的介入治疗现状.     

老年冠状动脉闭塞性病变介入治疗的临床评价

目的　观察冠状动脉闭塞性病变经皮冠状动脉内成形术 (PTCA)的成功率。方法　对 1 0 8例老年冠状动脉闭塞患者行PTCA或PTCA加支架治疗。结果　 39例急性心肌梗死患者直接行PTCA均获得成功 ;69例择期PTCA中 86处病变 ,60处成功 ,成功率 69 8%。无桥连侧支的闭塞性病变PTCA成功率 77 8% ,桥连侧支丰富的闭塞性病变PTCA成功率为 46 9%。仅 1例死于心源性休克。结论　老年冠状动脉闭塞患者血管闭塞时间越长 ,PTCA成功率越低 ,无桥连侧支的闭塞性病变PTCA成功率明显高于桥连侧支丰富的闭塞性病变PTCA成功率 ,提示老年冠状动脉闭塞性病变行PTCA或PTCA加支架术治疗安全、有效。     

Percutaneous stent implantation into coronary arteries in infants

Objectives: To investigate the feasibility, procedural techniques, safety, and overall potential of percutaneous coronary angioplasty and stent implantation in infants with coronary artery disease and acute coronary syndrome. Background: Despite extensive experience in adult patients, percutaneous coronary intervention remains uncommon in children and extremely rare in infants. Methods: Retrospective review including all children who underwent percutaneous coronary angioplasty in Rady Children's Hospital—San Diego during a period of 4 years. Results: Seven children including four children less than 15 months of age underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with coronary stent implantation in the proximal portion of the left or right coronary arteries. Successful stent placement with excellent revascularization was achieved in all cases. Mean coronary artery diameter was 0.65 mm prior to stent placement. Balloon angioplasty resulted in suboptimal resolution of coronary stenosis, thus bare metal stents were implanted in all cases, dilated to a mean of 2.5‐mm internal diameter. Average intervention‐free period was 434 days after stent implantation. In‐stent re‐stenosis and stent thrombosis did not occur if the implanted stent diameter was greater than 2.5 mm and the patient received dual anti‐platelet therapy. Conclusions: Our experience suggests that coronary artery stent implantation is a feasible and relatively safe palliative option in infants and toddlers with coronary stenosis. It is a viable strategy for bridging patients with acute ischemia or poor ventricular function to elective surgical revascularization or transplantation. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Percutaneous coronary intervention in a patient with single coronary artery

Coronary artery anomalies are found in 1–5% of all coronary angiograms. Single coronary artery is a rare congenital anomaly. The prevalence of the anomaly is 0.024–0.066% of the general population and percutaneous coronary intervention in this anomaly is performed infrequently. The highest incidence of this condition is reported from India. We report a case of a 55 year old patient of anterior wall ST elevation myocardial infarction with L1 group of single coronary artery who underwent successful angioplasty and stenting to left anterior descending artery. The unique features and inherent risks of percutaneous coronary intervention to single coronary artery are discussed.     

Long‐term follow‐up after nonurgent percutaneous coronary intervention in unprotected left main coronary arteries

Objectives : To evaluate the long‐term outcomes of the selected patients by the local Heart Team to undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) stenosis and to compare patients considered at low surgical risk versus at high surgical risk for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Background : CABG is recommended in patients with ULMCA stenosis according to the AHA/ACC and ESC guidelines, and there are limited data on the long‐term outcomes in patients selected by the local Heart Team to undergo PCI. Methods : Between 1996 and 2007, 227 patients underwent PCI for ULMCA stenosis based on decision of the local Heart Team and patient's and/or physician's preference. All patients were contacted at 1 year and in November 2008. Results : Long‐term follow‐up was up to 8 years with a mean of 3.9 ± 2.6 years. Overall, the Kaplan–Meier estimate of the composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), or target lesion revascularization (TLR) was 14.8% at 1 year, 18.3% at 3 years, and 20.9% at 5 years with no events occurring thereafter. Patients considered at low surgical risk for CABG had a significantly lower incidence of cardiac death or MI compared to patients considered at high surgical risk at 8 years (1.4 vs. 16.8%; 1.4 vs. 14.8%, respectively); however, no significant difference was observed for cardiac death, MI, or TLR (18.6 vs. 24.4%). Conclusions : PCI of ULMCA stenosis in patients selected by the Heart Team resulted in good long‐term clinical outcomes with most events occurring within the 1st year. Patients considered at low surgical risk for CABG have a significantly better long‐term survival than patients at high risk for surgery. © 2010 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

经尺动脉径路行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗12例

目的探讨经尺动脉径路行经皮冠状动脉介入(percutaneous coronary intervention,PCI)治疗的可行性与安全性。方法选择2006年12月～2008年12月在清华大学第一附属医院住院,完成冠状动脉造影检查的1360例患者中26例经尺动脉径路行冠状动脉造影患者为研究对象,其中冠状动脉性心脏病(冠心病)稳定型心绞痛患者12例,男8例,女4例,年龄(61±10.4)岁,行经尺动脉径路行PCI治疗。另外,选择26例经桡动脉造影的患者设为经桡动脉组。所有患者均行Allen′s试验检查,记录动脉穿刺时间,冠状动脉造影时间,计算穿刺成功率和并发症的发生率。结果两组穿刺成功率比较,差异无统计学意义(χ2=0.354,P>0.05)。两组冠状动脉造影时间比较,差异无统计学意义[(20.0±3.6)minvs.(20.0±4.2)min,P>0.05]。两组并发症发生率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。12例患者尺动脉均穿刺成功,应用6F指引导管对15条血管的17处病变行PCI治疗,均获得成功,共植入支架17枚。1例有穿刺部位淤血,无严重的出血并发症的发生。结论经尺动脉径路行PCI治疗是一种安全、...     

经桡动脉行无保护左主干病变介入治疗

目的:回顾性总结29例冠状动脉造影发现为无保护左主干开口及体部狭窄病例的冠脉介入治疗(PCI)资料,以探讨手术的安全性和可行性。方法:术前给予常规药物治疗,经桡动脉途径行PCI,观察桡动脉穿刺成功率、PCI即刻成功率、手术时间、支架扩张时间和扩张压力、住院期间严重并发症发生率、出院前心绞痛发作情况评估及术前心电图(ECG)特点分析。结果:29例患者桡动脉穿刺成功率和PCI即刻成功率均为100%,手术时间25～50(38±8)min,支架扩张时间3～7(5±1.3)s,支架扩张压力14～20(16.0±1.9)atm(1atm=101.325kPa),住院期间无严重并发症发生,前臂肿胀3例,术后心绞痛显著缓解。术前胸痛发作时ECG特点:典型"左主干"心电图17例,胸前导联ST-T改变者10例,间歇性左束支阻滞2例。结论:经桡动脉途径对无保护左主干开口和体部病变行PCI治疗,成功率高,安全有效。     

经左侧桡动脉途径冠状动脉介入治疗的临床分析

目的通过对比左右桡动脉两种途径行冠状动脉介入治疗的临床疗效,探讨经左侧桡动脉途径行冠状动脉介入治疗的安全性和有效性。方法入选2007年8月至2010年10月行经桡动脉途径冠状动脉介入治疗的患者970例,随机分为左侧桡动脉组486例（左侧组）,右侧桡动脉组484例（右侧组）,主要观察指标包括：介入手术成功率、血管开通时间、术中及术后不良事件发生率等。结果左侧组手术成功率为94.8,右侧组手术成功率为93.4,两组间差异无统计学意义。两组穿刺成功率、血管开通时间、X线透视时间、对比剂用量、手术总时间差异无统计学意义。结论经左侧桡动脉途径行冠状动脉介入治疗术安全有效。     

Percutaneous coronary intervention in nonagenarians: pros and cons

Percutaneous coronary intervention is a mainstay in the management of symptomatic or high-risk coronary artery disease. The bulk of clinical evidence and experience underlying this fact relies, however, on relatively young patients. Indeed, few data of very limited quality are available which adequately define the risk-benefit and cost-benefit profile of coronary angioplasty and stenting in very old subjects, such as those of 90 years of age or older (i.e., nonagenarians). The aim of this review is to provide a concise, yet practical, synthesis of the available evidence on percutaneous coronary revascularization in the very elderly. The main arguments elaborated upon are to what extent we can extrapolate findings from studies including younger patients to nonagenarians, whether we should provide higher priority to prognosis or quality of life in such patients, and whether we can afford to allocate vast resources to care for such subjects in an era of financial constraints. Our review of 18 studies and 1082 patients suggest that percutaneous coronary intervention is feasible and associated with acceptable short- and long-term results in this population, which is nonetheless fraught with a high mortality risk irrespective of the revascularization procedure. Accordingly, the pros and cons of percutaneous coronary intervention should be carefully weighed when considering this treatment in nonagenarians.     

The value of percutaneous coronary intervention in aortic valve stenosis with coronary artery disease

Objectives

The study determines whether treatment of coronary disease by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the presence of severe aortic stenosis (AS) is feasible and defines which patients might benefit most.

Background

Severe symptomatic AS is considered a class I indication for aortic valve replacement (AVR). Many patients with AS have concomitant coronary artery disease (CAD), and the true reason for symptoms is often unclear. It is common practice to combine AVR with coronary artery bypass grafting. However, in some cases PCI alone might improve symptoms and allow surgery to be deferred.

Methods

We analyzed 38 consecutive patients who underwent PCI for CAD in the presence of significant AS between 1989 and 2004. Data included demographic factors, clinical features, angiographic, and echocardiographic information. Events during follow-up included PCI complications, improvement post-PCI, AVR, and death. Statistical analysis was used to assess the impact of PCI on outcome and survival.

Results

The mean age of the study group was 71 ± 9.3 years, and the mean aortic valve area was 0.84 ± 0.28 (0.4-1.2) cm². Reasons for choosing PCI over surgery were patients’ preference, high surgical risk, and cardiologist recommendation. Thirty-five patients (92.1%) reported symptomatic improvement after PCI, and no major PCI-related complications were recorded. Significant predictors for long-term event-free survival were good functional class (P = .006) and single-vessel coronary disease (P = .017).

Conclusion

PCI in patients with severe AS and significant CAD is safe, offers relief of symptoms in most cases, and has good long-term outcome in a subset of patients who have mild CAD and good functional class. This therapeutic approach should be considered in such patients and in those with high surgical risk.