Coronary disease & ACSCross-sectional study

Reclassification of Chronic Total Occlusion (CTO) Crossing Strategies in the ERCTO Registry According to the CTO-ARC Consensus Recommendations

JACC Cardiovasc IntervPublished

  • Cross-sectional study
  • registry

Authors' conclusion

The application of CTO-ARC definitions allowed the reclassification of 6.7% of procedures as alternative antegrade crossing with retrograde or antegrade contribution which showed higher MACCE and lower technical success rates, as compared with true antegrade and retrograde crossing.

Study context

Population
Patients undergoing CTO PCI in the European Registry of Chronic Total Occlusions, 2021–2022
Participants
8,673 patients
Exposure
Alternative antegrade vs retrograde vs true antegrade CTO crossing
Outcome
Numbers, efficacy and safety of each final CTO crossing strategy per CTO-ARC recommendations

Main finding

As reported in the abstract

Technical success

P < 0.001

Observational data: associations, not effects.

Further findings

Distribution of crossing strategies

Antegrade approach
79.2%
Retrograde approach
20.8%
Antegrade wiring without retrograde contribution
n = 5,929 [68.4%]
Antegrade wiring with retrograde contribution
n = 446 [5.1%]
Antegrade dissection and re-entry without retrograde contribution
n = 353 [4.1%]
Antegrade dissection and re-entry with retrograde contribution
n = 137 [1.6%]
Retrograde wiring
n = 735 [8.4%]
Retrograde dissection and re-entry
n = 1,073 [12.4%]

Safety

Complications · across the three strategies

P < 0.001

Original publication

Reclassification of CTO Crossing Strategies in the ERCTO Registry According to the CTO-ARC Consensus Recommendations. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. Published 28 October 2024. doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2024.09.002

Summarised from the published abstract; every number is checked against it