Robotic percutaneous coronary intervention

Author(s):  
Giora Weisz

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has seen steady technological progress over the past four decades. Despite improved patient safety and efficacy, modern interventionalists continue to face significant occupational hazards, including radiation exposure, cataracts, and orthopaedic injuries. Robotic remote navigation systems have been developed to address the risks and procedural challenges associated with conventional PCI. The development of novel robotic remote control navigation systems represents the dawn of a new era of interventional cardiology.

2021 ◽  
Vol 42 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
A Golam Mostofa ◽  
T Parvin ◽  
R Masum Mandal ◽  
S Ali Ahsan ◽  
R Afrin

Abstract Background Prevention of hemorrhagic complications has emerged as a priority in patients undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) in addition to suppressing thrombotic complications. This goal is challenging to achieve in diabetic Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS) patients as Diabetes Mellitus (DM) itself is a prothrombotic state with more pronounced vascular injury response and have a worse outcome after PCI compared with non-diabetic patients. In patients with ACS, Bivalirudin has been shown to result in similar rates of composite ischemia as Heparin plus GPI (GP IIb /IIIa inhibitor), while significantly reducing major bleeding and has received class I recommendation for PCI by American College of Cardiology (ACC 2013). Whether Bivalirudin is safe and effective specially in diabetic ACS patients undergoing PCI, as compared with Heparin (UFH) monotherapy, is unknown. Purpose To determine and compare the incidence of in-hospital and 30-day hemorrhagic complications and major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) as evidence of safety and efficacy using Bivalirudin versus Heparin in diabetic ACS patients undergoing PCI. Methods 218 diabetic ACS patients (age>18 years and ≤75 years) who underwent PCI from May 2018 to April 2019 at University Cardiac Centre, BSM Medical University, Dhaka, Bangladesh were randomly assigned to have UFH or Bivalirudin. Before the guide wire crossed the lesion, 111 patients in the UFH group received a bolus of 70–100 U/kg (targeted activated clotting time, ACT: 200–250 s). 107 patients in the Bivalirudin group received a loading dose of 0.75 mg/kg, followed by an infusion of 1.75 mg/kg/h for up to 4 hours. Dual antiplatelet (DAPT) loading as Aspirin 300 mg plus P2Y12 inhibitors (Clopidogrel 600 mg or Prasugrel 60 mg or Ticagrelor 180 mg) was given in all patients before the procedure. The maintenance dose of DAPT was continued for at least one month and patients were followed telephonically up to 30 days. The outcome measures were in-hospital and 30-day hemorrhagic complications and MACEs [death, MI, target vessel revascularization (TVR) and stroke]. Results Patients treated with Bivalirudin compared with Heparin had a significantly lower in-hospital incidence of QMI (0% vs. 6%; p=0.03) and major bleeding (0% vs. 7%; p=0.02). However, the incidence of cardiac death, stent thrombosis, TVR were no differences between two groups (p>0.05). There was only one NQMI in the Bivalirudin group as opposed to 8% in the Heparin group in 30 days following stenting (p=0.04). Conclusion In diabetic ACS patients undergoing PCI, Bivalirudin is safe and effective as it reduces immediate and short-term hemorrhagic complications as well as MACEs as compared with Heparin. FUNDunding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None.


Author(s):  
Rod Stables

This chapter identifies general principles for the practice of interventional cardiology. The focus is on general strategic approach and the exposition of core concepts rather than details of equipment selection and manipulation. Although framed for percutaneous coronary intervention, the philosophy will translate to all forms of interventional cardiology. In contemporary activity adverse events are fortunately rare and it is very difficult for an individual operator to identify ‘best practice’ on the basis of personal experience and individual reflection. These ‘golden rules’ are based on lessons, sometimes learned at cost to patients and operators, over three decades. Knowledge of these issues and a more systematic approach may provide a framework for safe and effective practice.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document