Improved Angina Symptoms Following Coronary Sinus Flow Reducer Implantation in a Patient with Refractory Angina and Chronic Total Occlusion: A Case Report — Oak Academic Publishing
Research ArticleOpen AccessGoogle Scholar indexed
Improved Angina Symptoms Following Coronary Sinus Flow Reducer Implantation in a Patient with Refractory Angina and Chronic Total Occlusion: A Case Report
Clinical Institute of Radiology, University Medical Center Ljubljana, Zaloska, Ljubljana, Slovenia
,
Clinical Department of Cardiology, University Medical Center Ljubljana, Zaloska, Ljubljana, Slovenia
,
Clinical Department of Cardiology, University Medical Center Ljubljana, Zaloska, Ljubljana, Slovenia
,
Clinical Department of Cardiology, University Medical Center Ljubljana, Zaloska, Ljubljana, Slovenia
1 Clinical Institute of Radiology, University Medical Center Ljubljana, Zaloska, Ljubljana, Slovenia
2 Clinical Department of Cardiology, University Medical Center Ljubljana, Zaloska, Ljubljana, Slovenia
3 Clinical Department of Cardiology, University Medical Center Ljubljana, Zaloska, Ljubljana, Slovenia
4 Clinical Department of Cardiology, University Medical Center Ljubljana, Zaloska, Ljubljana, Slovenia
Background: Due to the aging population and increased survival of the patients with coronary artery disease, there is an increasing number of patients with debilitating angina refractory to optimal medical treatment who are not candidates for revascularization. In case of low ischemic load, the treatment of stable refractory angina is aimed at symptom reduction. There are several new treatment methods targeting myocardial ischemia available, including coronary sinus flow reducer (CFR) implantation. Case Report: We report a case of a patient suffering from CCS class IV angina despite optimal medical therapy, with further revascualrization options exhausted, who was successfully treated with coronary sinus flow reducer (CFR). Besides technical skill to reach ostium of coronary sinus, the most important technical tip is precise positioning of the CFR. The reduction of angina symptoms started after epithelisation of CFR frame, usually 6 - 7 weeks after implantation. At 6-month follow-up, the patient reported a marked reduction of angina symptoms, with CCS grade improving by three classes (from IV to I). At 10-month follow-up, the sustainment of CCS grade I angina symptoms was reported by the patient. Conclusions: We conclude that CFR can be safely and successfully implanted in patients suffering from refractory angina. Considerable improvements in CCS grade may be experienced in certain cases.
KeywordsChest PainRefractory Angina PectorisMyocardial IschemiaCoronary Sinus Flow ReducerChronic Total Occlusion
Banai, S., Ben Muvhar, S., Parikh, K.H., et al. (2007) Coronary Sinus Reducer Stent for the Treatment of Chronic Refractory Angina Pectoris: A Prospective, Open-Label, Multicenter, Safety Feasibility First-in-Man Study. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 49, 1783-1789. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2007.01.061
Mannheimer, C., Camici, P., Chester, M.R., et al. (2002) The Problem of Chronic Refractory Angina; Report from the ESC Joint Study Group on the Treatment of Refractory Angina. European Heart Journal, 23, 355-370. https://doi.org/10.1053/euhj.2001.2706
Williams, B., Menon, M., Satran, D., et al. (2010) Patients with Coronary Artery Disease Not Amenable to Traditional Revascularization: Prevalence and 3-Year Mortality. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions, 75, 886-891. https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.22431
Giannini, F., Aurelio, A., Jabbour, R.J., et al. (2017) The Coronary Sinus Reducer: Clinical Evidence and Technical Aspects. Expert Review of Cardiovascular Therapy, 15, 47-58. https://doi.org/10.1080/14779072.2017.1270755
Weigel, G., Kajgana, I., Bergmeister, H., et al. (2007) Beck and Back: A Paradigm Change in Coronary Sinus Interventions—Pulsatile Stretch on Intact Coronary Venous Endothelium. The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 133, 1581-1587. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtcvs.2006.12.044
Konigstein, M., Verheye, S., Jolicœur, E.M. and Banai, S. (2016) Narrowing of the Coronary Sinus: A Device-Based Therapy for Persistent Angina Pectoris. Cardiology in Review, 24, 238-243. https://doi.org/10.1097/CRD.0000000000000101
Beck, C.S. and Leighninger, D.S. (1954) Operations for Coronary Artery Disease. The Journal of the American Medical Association, 156, 1226-1233. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1954.02950130006002
Verheye, S., Jolicœur, E.M., Pettersson, T., et al. (2015) Efficacy of a Device to Narrow the Coronary Sinus in Refractory Angina. The New England Journal of Medicine, 372, 519-527. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1402556
Konigstein, M., Meyten, N., Verheye, S., et al. (2014) Transcatheter Treatment for Refractory Angina with the Coronary Sinus Reducer. EuroIntervention, 9, 1158-1164. https://doi.org/10.4244/EIJV9I10A196
Henry, T.D., Satran, D., Hodges, J.S., et al. (2013) Long-Term Survival in Patients with Refractory Angina. European Heart Journal, 34, 2683-2638. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/eht165
Sorbets, E., Fox, K.M., Elbez, Y., et al. (2019) Long-Term Outcomes of Chronic Coronary Syndrome Worldwide: Insights from the International CLARIFY Registry. European Heart Journal, ehz660. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehz660
Abdallah, M.S., Wang, K., Magnuson, E.A., et al. (2017) Quality of Life after Surgery or DES in Patients with 3-Vessel or Left Main Disease. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 69, 2039-2050. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2017.02.031
Bernstein, S., Brorsson, B., Aberg, T., et al. (1999) Appropriateness of Referral of Coronary Angiography Patients in Sweden. Heart, 81, 470-477. https://doi.org/10.1136/hrt.81.5.470
Grandjean, T., Haefliger, D., Arroyo, D. and Cook, S. (2018) Coronary Sinus Reduction for the Treatment of Refractory Angina: A Novel Tool for the Treatment of Angina Pectoris Resistant to Optimal Conventional Therapy. Cardiovascular Medicine, 21, 170-173. https://doi.org/10.4414/cvm.2018.00558
Ferrari, R., Camici, P.G., Crea, F., et al. (2018) Expert Consensus Document: A ‘Diamond’ Approach to Personalized Treatment of Angina. Nature Reviews Cardiology, 15, 120-132. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrcardio.2017.131
Knuuti, J., Wijns, W., Saraste, A., et al. (2019) 2019 ESC Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Chronic Coronary Syndromes: The Task Force for the Diagnosis and Management of Chronic Coronary Syndromes of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). European Heart Journal, ehz425.
McGillion, M., Arthur, H.M., Cook, A., et al. (2012) Management of Patients with Refractory Angina: Canadian Cardiovascular Society/Canadian Pain Society Joint Guidelines. Canadian Journal of Cardiology, 28, S20-S41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjca.2011.07.007
Abawi, M., Nijhoff, F., Stella, P.R., et al. (2016) Safety and Efficacy of a Device to Narrow the Coronary Sinus for the Treatment of Refractory Angina: A Single-Centre Real-World Experience. Netherlands Heart Journal, 24, 544-551. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12471-016-0862-2
Giannini, F., Baldetti, L., Ielasi, A., et al. (2017) First Experience with the Coronary Sinus Reducer System for the Management of Refractory Angina in Patients without Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease. JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions, 10, 1901-1903. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2017.06.062
Konigstein, M., Giannini, F. and Banai, S. (2018) The Reducer Device in Patients with Angina Pectoris: Mechanisms, Indications, and Perspectives. European Heart Journal, 39, 925-933. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehx486
Baldetti, L., Colombo, A., Banai, S., et al. (2018) Coronary Sinus Reducer Non-Responders: Insights and Perspectives. EuroIntervention, 13, 1667-1669. https://doi.org/10.4244/EIJ-D-17-00626
Cortese, B., Di Palma, G. and Latini, R. (2018) Coronary Sinus Perforation during Reducer Implantation. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions, 91, 1291-1293. https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.27549
Kranjec, I., Zavrl Dzananovic, D., Mrak, M. and Bunc, M. (2019) Robustness of Percutaneously Completed Coronary Revascularization in Stable Coronary Artery Disease: Obstructive versus Occlusive Lesions. Angiology, 70, 78-86. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003319718767737
Park, S.-J. (2017) Drug-Eluting Stent versus Optimal Medical Therapy in Patients with Coronary Chronic Total Occlusion: DECISION CTO Randomized Trial. American College of Cardiology Annual Scientific Session 2017, Washington, DC, USA, 18 March 2017.
Werner, G.S., Martin-Yuste, V., Hildick-Smith, D., et al. (2018) A Randomized Multicentre Trial to Evaluate the Utilization of Revascularization or Optimal medical Therapy for the Treatment of Chronic Total Coronary Occlusions. European Heart Journal, 39, 2484-2493. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehy220
Cheng, K. and de Silva, R. (2018) New Advances in the Management of Refractory Angina Pectoris. European Cardiology Review, 13, 70-79. https://doi.org/10.15420/ecr.2018:1:2
Neumann, F.J., Sousa-Uva, M., Ahlsson, A., et al. (2019) 2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on Myocardial Revascularization. European Heart Journal, 40, 87-165.