Is it Worthy Enough to Revascularize Chronically Occluded Coronaries?

Abstract

Chronic total occlusions (CTOs) represent the “final frontier” of coronary interventions with the lowest procedural success rates and the most common reason for incomplete revascularization and referral to coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG). CTO lesions are not an infrequent finding during coronary angiography. They are often responsible for enhancing the complexity of the coronary disease burden thereby affecting the final interventional decision in the process. Notwithstanding the modest technical success of CTO-PCI, most of the earlier observational data demonstrated a clear survival benefit free of major cardiovascular events (MACE) in patients undergoing successful CTO revascularization. However, data from recent randomized trials fail to uphold the same survival advantage albeit, showing some trend toward improvement in left ventricular function, quality of life indicators and freedom from fatal ventricular arrythmia. Various guidance statements propose a well-defined role for CTO intervention in specific situations provided criterions for patient selection, appreciable inducible ischemia, myocardial viability and cost-risk-benefit analysis are met.