Predicting Residual Angina After Chronic Total Occlusion Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Insights from the OPEN‐CTO Registry

Angiography-derived physiological assessment after percutaneous coronary intervention of chronic total occlusions

Scant data exploring potential suboptimal physiological results after angiographic successful percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of chronic total occlusion (CTO) are available. Sixty cases of successful CTO-PCI were selected for this retrospective analysis. Post-CTO-PCI angiography-based fractional flow reserve was computed using the Murray-based fractional flow reserve (μFR) software. Vessel-specific μFR, residual trans-stent gradient (TSG) and corrected TSGstent were calculated. In physiological suboptimal results (μFR < 0.90), the virtual pullback pressure gradient (PPG) curves were analyzed to localize the main pressure drop-down and characterize the patterns of residual disease. The virtual pullback pressure gradient index (vPPGi) was then calculated to objectively characterize the predominant pattern of residual disease (diffuse vs focal). The physiological result was suboptimal in 28 cases (46.7%). The main pressure drop was localised proximal to the stent in 2 (7.1%), distal in 17 (60.7%) and intra-stent in 9 cases (32.2%). Intra-stent residual disease was diffuse in 7 cases and mixed in 2. Distal residual disease was characterised by a pure focal pattern in 12 cases, diffuse in 2 and mixed in 3. In the predominant diffuse phenotype (vPPGi < 0.65), we found a higher rate of TSG ≥ 0.04 (61.5% vs 20.0%, p = 0.025) and TSGstent ≥ 0.009 (46.2% vs 20.0%, p = 0.017) while in the dominant focal phenotype poor-quality distal vessel was constantly present. In our cohort, post-CTO-PCI suboptimal physiological result was frequent (46.7%). Predominant focal phenotype was constantly associated with poor-quality distal vessel, while in the predominant diffuse phenotype, the rate of TSG ≥ 0.04 and TSGstent ≥ 0.009 were significantly higher.

Coronary sinus narrowing therapy: A "Reducer" for angina and beyond

Refractory Angina (RA) is an increasingly common clinical diagnosis, in which patients unsuitable for further percutaneous or surgical procedures experience anginal symptoms, despite receiving optimal medical therapy. This clinical condition challenges the everyday activities and diminishes the quality of life of these patients. A wide variety of novel therapies for this type of angina are being investigated for clinical use. One of them is coronary sinus narrowing, which is performed as a percutaneous interventional procedure using catheter-delivered device, the Reducer. The device is implanted in the coronary sinus creating a physical narrowing and a pressure gradient in the sinus. This intervention improves the impaired blood flow in the ischemic regions of the heart leading to the relief of the anginal symptoms and, therefore, the overall clinical improvement of these patients. Several clinical trials have established both the safety and efficacy of the coronary sinus Reducer, while ongoing trials are aiming to further establish the procedure's safety and efficiency in both RA and other cardiovascular diseases, such as coronary microvascular dysfunction. This review aims to discuss the pathophysiology and the role of the coronary sinus Reducer in RA, the clinical trials documenting its safety and efficacy, as well as the future perspectives of this procedure among cardiovascular diseases.

Dilemmas in cardiology: when to recanalize a chronic total occlusion

The decision whether or not to recanalize a chronic total occlusion (CTO) of a coronary artery is truly a dilemma for the cardiologist. The procedure is in fact complex, with a non-negligible rate of complications and with a probability of success lower than that of non-obstructive lesions. The analysis of the data available in the literature, with the significant discrepancy between the results of the randomized studies and the observational studies, does not currently allow conclusive statements on the role of the percutaneous coronary interventions in CTO. It is therefore essential to incorporate clinical, anatomical and procedural elements into the decision-making algorithm. While awaiting new randomized clinical trials of greater dimensions and better methodology, a careful selection of patients is certainly essential, limiting the procedure to those who are symptomatic or who have a high ischaemic burden and excluding those who have no evidence of vitality, without which it is not legitimate to expect any benefit from the intervention. Finally, the presence of the collateral circulation does not in itself appear to be an element that should have a significant decision-making role.

The challenges of a randomised placebo-controlled trial of CTO PCI vs. placebo with optimal medical therapy: The ORBITA-CTO pilot study design and protocol

Background

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for coronary chronic total occlusion (CTO) has been performed for the improvement of symptoms and quality of life in patients with stable angina. The ORBITA study demonstrated the role of the placebo effect in contemporary PCI in non-CTO chronic coronary syndromes. However, the benefit of CTO PCI beyond that of a placebo has not been demonstrated.

Aims

The ORBITA-CTO pilot study will be a double-blind, placebo-controlled study of CTO PCI randomising patients who have: (1) been accepted by a CTO operator for PCI; (2) experienced symptoms due to a CTO; (3) evidence of ischaemia; (4) evidence of viability within the CTO territory; and (5) a J-CTO score ≤3.

Methods

Patients will undergo medication optimisation that will ensure they are on at least a minimum amount of anti-anginals and complete questionnaires. Patients will record their symptoms on an app daily throughout the study. Patients will undergo randomisation procedures, including an overnight stay, and be discharged the following day. All anti-anginals will be stopped after randomisation and re-initiated on a patient-led basis during the 6-month follow-up period. At follow-up, patients will undergo repeat questionnaires and unblinding, with a further 2-week unblinded follow-up.

Results

The co-primary outcomes are feasibility (blinding) in this cohort and angina symptom score using an ordinal clinical outcome scale for angina. Secondary outcomes include changes in quality-of-life measures, Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ), peak VO2, and anaerobic threshold on the cardiopulmonary exercise test.

Conclusion

The feasibility of a placebo-controlled CTO PCI study will lead to future studies assessing efficacy. The impact of CTO PCI on angina measured using a novel daily symptom app may provide improved fidelity in assessing symptoms in patients with CTO's.