Seminar
Curriculum in Cath. Lab: Coronary Hardware - Part I
The Choice of Guiding Catheter.
Sundeep Mishra, Vinay K. Bahl
Department of Cardiology, AIIMS, New Delhi, India
Selection of guide catheter is elementary but an issue of extreme importance in performance of percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). It is often the difference between a successfully executed procedure and a failure. Currently a variety of guiding catheters are available, each with a unique design and construction, which has vastly improved the technique of PCI1-3. Compared to diagnostic catheters, guiding catheters have a stiffer shaft, larger internal diameter (ID), a shorter & more angulated tip (110º vs. 90º), and re-enforced construction (3vs.2 layers). For each given size of guiding catheter, its ID is either a standard, large or giant lumen. In general larger sizes allow for better opacification of the contrast, better guide support and allow pressure monitoring, albeit at a cost of increased risk of ostial trauma, vascular complications and the possibility of kinking of catheter shaft. Larger lumen diameters are mandated when using bulky interventional devices like rotablator, laser, atherectomy catheter, some vascular protection/imaging devices or some special interventional techniques like kissing balloon or kissing stent. Guiding catheters are generally composed of 3 layers. The outer layer consists of either polyurethane or polyethylene for overall stiffness. The middle layer is composed of a wire matrix for torque generation and the inner coating is composed of Teflon for smooth passage of balloon catheter (Fig. 1a). It has generally three curves responsible for its overall unique configuration (Fig. 1b).
Types of Guiding Catheters
Judkins and Amplatz: Guiding catheters are available in several shapes (Fig. 2). However, choosing the right guiding catheter has always been a dilemma. Judkins catheter is extremely useful as a diagnostic catheter because its primary curve is fixed, therefore it intubates only a small segment of ostium of either left main coronary artery (LMCA) or right coronary artery (RCA) and thus carries less risk of trauma to these vessels. However, this same property causes a serious limitation while performing PCI. Since primary curve is fixed, the catheter may not be co-axial with the index artery. Since the catheter makes an angle of nearly 90º with the treated artery, at times it may be difficult to pass balloons and
 |
| Figure 1a. Guide catheter construction |
 |
| Figure 1b. Curves in guide catheter |
| other interventional devices. The fixed primary curve is especially disadvantageous in left circumflex (LCX) interventions because the angle may become more, even up to 180º in some cases. On the top of that there is a secondary curve which is long and straight and makes another 90º angle, adding to the difficulty in delivering interventional devices. Furthermore, with Judkins Left (JL), the point of contact on ascending aorta is very high and narrow, increasing the chance of prolapse and dislodgement (3a). On the other hand, there is no point of contact of Judkins Right (JR) with aorta at all providing for extremely poor support provided for performing RCA interventions (Fig. 3b). Ikari et al quantitatively measured the backup force of guiding catheters for the left coronary artery. Three factors were found to be associated with the backup force: catheter size, angle (theta) of the catheter on the reverse side of the aorta and the area of contact made by the catheter on aorta4. The angle (theta) determines the force that can dislodge the guiding catheter. |
E-mail: drsundeepmishra@hotmail.com
|
 |
| Figure 2. Shapes of guiding catheters |
 |
| Figure 3a. Mechanism of support with different type of guiding catheters. |
 |
| Figure 3b. Non-coaxial support provided by Judkins catheter |
 |
| Figure 3c. For tortuous LAD, XB catheter is more co-axial and provides good support |
 |
| Figure 3d. For tortuous LAD, XB - LAD catheter is also more co-axial and provides good support |
 |
| Figure 3e. Hockey Stick guide catheter for |
|
 |
Figure 3f. AL1 guiding catheter provides better support for RCA interventions |
 |
| Figure 3g. Multipurpose guiding catheter is very useful for inferior take-off of SVG graft to RCA. |
If this angle is small, it results in a greater backup
force. Therefore a lower position is preferable as the point
of contact on the reverse side of the aorta because the
angle approaches 90º. The better guiding support provided by
the larger catheter size and larger area of contact on aorta
is logical. With Judkins catheter the point of contact is
narrow and higher on the aorta contributing to weak back up
support. On the other hand with Amplatz Left (AL) type of
catheter, base of sweeping secondary curve is intended to rest on
the aortic root, providing for additional back-up
support. However, this same property makes it prone to dissect
the ostium of intubated artery.
Other Guiding Catheters: Long tip guiding catheters like Xtra backup (XB) and Extra back up (EBU) are essentially |
 |
| Figure 3h. Selection of catheters for saphenous vein grafts. a) MP b) MP or JR or AL c) HS d) HS or AL |
 |
| Figure 3i. LCB catheter for PCI of SVG to obstuse marginal |
modifications for JL, making them stiffer and with a
free primary curve, allowing them to become more co-axial
and also provide more support. XB distal tip section lies
more horizontal within coronary ostium, sometimes
pointing upwards, and intubating more in the LMCA. A
longer segment of XB catheter comes in contact with
contra-lateral wall of aorta to markedly enhance back-up support. On
an average XB catheter provides 67% additional support
as compared with JR4. However, this extra-support is at the
cost of increased likelihood of trauma to left main, especially
if there is already some pre-existing plaque. Furthermore
being stiffer there is a larger chance of injury to other branches
of vascular tree, particularly if the catheter is not
withdrawn over a guide-wire. Thus these catheters are probably not for |
|
Guide Catheter for RCA Interventions: During RCA interventions, JR or Hockey Stick (HS) is usually preferred (Fig. 3e)5,6. If extra-support is required, e.g. chronic total occlusion (CTO) or tortuous lesions, AL1 catheter can be torqued into RCA, while the larger secondary curve rests on the aortic root, gaining additional back-up support, buttressing within the aortic cusp (Fig. 3f). Multipurpose (MP) guiding catheter is especially useful for abnormal take-offs from aorta, especially inferior orientations (Fig. 3g). Three dimensional right curve (3 DRC) catheter is another versatile catheter for tortuous, bent anatomy and posterior or superior take off of RCA. In the Arani catheter, the double angle 90 º curve sits on ascending aorta in S configuration and is therefore useful for RCA with horizontal take-off. The primary and secondary curve provides two contact points on the opposite side of aorta thus providing tremendous back-up support7. However, although Arani catheters provide excellent back up support, because of their straight tip, they are often very difficult to engage. XBR and XBRCA are some new catheters developed specifically for the inferior and superior take off of RCA respectively.
Guide Catheter for LCX Interventions: Due to inherent tortuousity of LCX, interventions on this vessel are sometimes associated with difficulty in guidewire passage and balloon tracking. JL 4 may be gently rotated clockwise to achieve a stable co-axial alignment. If the aortic root is dialted or if JL 4 catheter points anteriorly, JL 5 may be used. Traditionally if additional support is required Amplatz guiding catheters have been recommended. They are also especially useful if there is sharp angulation or abrupt downward origin of LCX from LMCA. AL catheters can sometimes cause deep engagement into LMCA. In that case they should be very carefully disengaged from the coronary artery. Unlike JL catheters a simple withdrawal can cause the tip to advance even further into coronary artery. The best way to disengage an AL catheter is to advance it slightly, to prolapse the tip out of the artery and then rotate it out of the ostium prior to withdrawl8 . The Voda catheter has multiple, non-sharp bends taking contour of aorta providing for a very good support with less catheter manipulation vis a vis Amplatz guide9. In another comparison with JL or AL guides they were found to be as effective as either of them but could be
Guide Catheter for Saphenous Vein Grafts and LIMA Interventions: For saphenous vein graft (SVG) interventions, JR guiding catheter is usually chosen. However, for abnormal take-offs or abnormal positions of graft, AL1 or MP guiding catheter may be more appropriate (Fig 3h). Alternately, special catheters may be used in difficult cases. El Gamal (EGB) is a pre-shaped catheter with improved distal end-portion for accessing bypass grafts and more precise access of RCA. The extra tip segment is slightly longer which allows it to rest against contra-lateral wall for support. It is useful for delivering bulky devices. Left or Right Coronary Bypass (LCB/RCB) is another preformed catheter which has been found useful in some cases (Fig. 3i). LCB catheter is designed for left coronary venous bypass grafts. Its tip has 90 º bend with 70º secondary bend. It is shaped much like a cobra catheter. RCB catheter is designed for right coronary venous bypass grafts, its tip and secondary bends approximate 120º. It is shaped much like a JR catheter with a shallower tip bend. Multipurpose A-1 may also useful in this situation since it has a straight tip which often falls into right coronary bypass grafts easily. Internal mammary artery (IMA) catheter is designed for both Rt. and left Internal Mammary arteries. It is shaped like a JR catheter but with a steeply angled tip (80 to 85º).
Side Holes versus No Side Holes
Side holes are useful where the pressure gets frequently damped as in RCA interventions, where prolonged intubation of index artery is mandated like CTO interventions or when it is of utmost importance to know the pressure through out the procedure without interruption, for example while performing interventions on sole surviving artery or left main interventions. However, it is not mandated while doing routine left coronary artery PCI or interventions in RCA when use of bulky devices is anticipated. Side holes are mainly useful to prevent catheter damping (occlusion of the coronary ostium). Since the sidehole will admit aortic pressure, it will not be damped. Another benefit of sideholes is that they allow additional blood flow out the tip, to perfuse the artery. Side holes may also help avoid catastrophic dissections in the ostium of the artery if the guide catheter is not co-axial. However, while side holes prevent catheter damping, it can be a false sense of security because now, aortic pressure, and not the coronary pressure is being monitored. The guider can
|
| still occlude the ostium and the problem will not be
identified just watching the pressure monitor. Other problems
with side-hole catheters include suboptimal opacification
as contrast escapes through side holes, reduction in back
up support provided because of weakness of catheter shaft
and the kinking at side holes9.
Choice of Guiding Catheters: Depends on the size of aorta, location of ostia on the aorta, the kind of back-up required and whether the artery arises from a normal origin or anomalously, Table 111. Table 1. Choice of Guiding Catheters |
| Left Coronary Artery: |
|
• Normal Aorta : JL4, AL2, XB 3.5, EBU, Voda • Dilated Aorta : JL5, AL3, XB4 • Dilated Ectatic Aorta : JL6, AL3, XB4.5 • More Back-up : EBU, XB3.5, Voda, XB-LAD • Superior Take-off : AL2 ST • Inferior Take-off : MP A, JL 4 MOD • High Take-off : AL3, AL4, JL3.5 • Low Take-off : AL1.5 • Posterior Take-off : AL2 • Anamolous CX : MP Right Coronary Artery: • Normal Aorta : HS, JR4, AR2 • Dilated Aorta : JR5 • Superior Take-off : AL, AR 2, HS, DA 75 • Inferior Take-off : MP A, HS, AL, AR, JR 4 ST, JR 4 MOD • High Take-off : AR2, JR 3.5 (0.5 smaller size), RCB, MP • LIMA • JR catheter |
• Anomalous Origin : JL, HS, 3DRC, AL1, MP, AL2, LCB, JR • Anterior Origin : AL, MP • Posterior Origin : AL1, AR 2 • Shepard Crook RCA : AL, LIMA, HS, 3DRC, MP Saphenous Vein Grafts : • RCA graft usual location : Primary MP, Alternate JR, AL, RCB, HS, EGB • RCA graft anterior location : Primary AL, Alternate JR, MP, HS • LCA graft : Primary JR, HS, Alternate : AL, LCB, MP, EGB • LCA graft anterior location : Primary AL, HS Alternate : JR, LCB, MP Left Internal Mammary: Guide Catheter for PCI of Tortuous Arteries: Tortuous coronary arteries often provide a challenge to the interventional cardiologist. PCI of these lesions is associated with a lower success rate (70-85%) and higher acute complications (up-to 15%)12-15. Tortuousity may be defined as at least 2 or more than 75º bend proximal to the target lesion or at least one proximal bend 90º. Proper selection of hardware, guide catheters, guide wire and balloon catheter is critical for success and safety of these procedures. The pre-requisites for guide catheter is better support, perfect co-axiality, kink resistance and ability to fix the tip of catheter in ostium of intubated artery contributing to a stable position. For LAD interventions XB, or XB LAD is chosen (3c & d). Whereas a Voda or EBU catheter may be appropriate for the LCX interventions.Guide Techniques for PCI of Tortuous Arteries: Deep Seating of Guide: Deep seating of guide catheter is a technique in which guide catheter is deeply intubated into the artery to be treated. Deep seating can significantly increase the guide support and help deliver angioplasty balloons or stents to the target lesion, both in native coronary arteries and in coronary bypass grafts. Deep seating of RCA or LCX can be accomplished by clockwise rotation and gentle advancing of the guide over the guide wire, whereas counterclockwise rotation is required for LAD (Fig. 4). Another technique is to retract balloon as the guide catheter is advanced and gently rotated clockwise. Extreme care is taken to maintain distal guide wire position and avoid vessel trauma. As soon as the balloon catheter reaches the site of stenosis, the guide catheter is withdrawn to its original position. However, deep guide seating carries a risk of dissection and distal artery embolization especially when used in degenerated SVG. The risk can be minimized by using small size (such as 5 Fr), soft-tip guide catheter and by meticulous attention to maintaining an adequate pressure waveform and to minimizing the length of time that the guide remains deeply engaged. Child in Mother Technique: Mother and Child Technique is another technique to improve support provided by guide catheter system (Figure 5). It involves 110cm long, 5Fr guide (Child) in 100cm long, 6Fr guide catheter (Mother). Child in Mother could also be 5Fr guide in 7Fr guide catheter 16. It has been estimated that this technique may provide up-to 70% more support. Possible complications associated with Child in Mother technique are either trauma to vessel resulting in dissection or air embolism usually occurring during intubation of child catheter or during angiography performed via the mother guiding catheter. |
|
 |
| Figure 4. Deep seating of MP guide catheter to treat tortuous SVG graft to obstuse marginal. Guide catheter is advanced over mid-portion of SVG using Glide wire. |
 |
| Figure 5 Child in Mother Technique provides much more support than when only a single guiding catheter is used. This technique is especially useful while tackling tortuous lesions |
| Shepard's Crook RCA
Shepard's crook configuration of RCA i.e. a dramatic upturn with a near-180º switchback turn also presents a challenge to the operator. Here crux of the matter is the support provided by guiding catheter. Several studies have shown that PTCA of this morphology is associated with significantly lower primary success rate but similar long-term outcome when compared to PTCA of right coronary arteries without this anatomic variation 8, 17. In view of less support provided and non-coaxial orientation JR is particularly unsuited for this type of RCA configuration. As soon as one attempts to wire the RCA, the guide catheter gets unhooked and thrown off in the aorta. Guide catheters AL1/0.75 and 3DRC are best suited for the anatomy (Fig. 6a&b). The 3DRC guiding catheter is especially useful in this configuration because it is easier to manipulate in the aorta than other RCA guiding catheters (that need to be torqued 180 into position), the |
 |
| Figure 6a. AL1 catheter for Shepard's Crook RCA |
 |
| Figure 6b. 3DRC catheter provides a better support for performing interventions on Shepard's Crook RCA |
| 3DRC shape allows selective coaxial cannulation of the
RCA in a very gentle and less traumatic way and there is
an excellent contralateral back-up support from the
aorta 18 . Other guide catheters that have been used for this
condition are Arani 75º, El Gamal, Right Voda and JR4 catheters.
LIMA Interventions Interventions of LIMA present a special problem to the interventionists. They are not only tortuous but also may be extremely redundant, so that it may be difficult to reach the lesion. The problem of redundancy can be overcome by using longer shaft balloons (150 cm) or choosing brachial or radial approach and shorter guide catheters (90 cm). Difficulty in cannulation of LIMA using femoral approach may be another problem. This problem may arise because of proximal tortuousity of sub-clavian part or acute angle between the proximal sub-clavian artery and the proximal LIMA. This difficulty can be overcome by entering in the left anterior oblique (LAO) 60° projection (as it elongates the aortic arch and allows for excellent visualization of the great vessels). In this projection left sub-clavian artery (LSA) usually originates just distal to the left edge of tracheal air stripe and a gentle counter clockwise rotation of LIMA catheter will result in rapid engagement of LSA. If sub-clavian artery cannot be entered with a preformed LIMA, a JR guiding catheter may |
|
be used and later exchanged with LIMA catheter. If
tortuousity of LSA is extreme and precludes the tracking of
guide catheter into LIMA, an ipsilateral brachial or radial
approach may be used. Forceful engagement of IMA should be
strictly avoided as it is very prone to dissection or spasm. For
LIMA engagement, a LIMA catheter is preferred over JR as it
is more co-axial (Fig.7). Generally, AP projection is the
best view, but if difficulty is encountered shallow RAO 20-30°
for the LIMA or LAO projection for the RIMA intervention
may help. If still there is a problem it is recommended to
intubate in a view which opens up the ostium of LIMA for
example LAO 60°. For avoiding spasm, patients should be
pretreated with nitroglycerin (NTG) and verapamil. Frequent
boluses of NTG 100 µg may be used liberally. If the IMA is small,
a 6-7 Fr guide may be useful. After performance of
balloon dilatation, it is important to ensure that withdrawal of
balloon catheter does not cause the guide catheter to be pulled
into origin of IMA because it might cause traumatic dissection
of IMA19.
|
 |
| Figure 7. LIMA catheter for LIMA interventions |
Guiding Catheter Related Complications The overall complication rates of PCI procedures are higher than diagnostic catheterization20. In patients undergoing PCI, guide catheter related complications pertain to either embolism |
(air, atheroma or thrombus) or dissection
of coronary tree, aorta, abdominal aorta or iliac artery.
The incidence of clinically apparent embolization and
stroke associated with diagnostic catheterization is less than
1%20. However, the incidence of catheter-related embolism
in necropsy studies has been reported to be as high as 30
% 21-22. Air embolism can be prevented by maintaining air free
PTCA assembly at all times and performing frequent bleed
backs. Guide catheters are generally stiff and large-bore. These design characteristics can be more traumatic to the aorta
than diagnostic catheters which are more flexible, have
smaller lumens and tapered tips. Keely et al demonstrated
aortic debris scraped by the guiding catheter in more than half
the cases23. The incidence of atheromatous debris varied
with the type of the catheter used (24% to 65%). The JL and
MP guiding catheters were associated with the highest amount
of aortic debris production, particularly large debris visible
at the time of catheter advancement compared to
the other guiding catheters evaluated. The JR catheters were the
least likely to lead to debris
production. The authors postulated that the shapes of the JL and MP
catheters are more traumatic to the aorta owing to their long
secondary curves, acting as "atherectomy devices" as they pass
across friable plaques. Atheromatous embolism during contrast injections can
be avoided by allowing sufficient "back
bleeding" from the guiding catheter after
attaching the Y-connector and each time after the wire removal. Embolism of thrombotic
material is another complication encountered during
therapeutic procedures. It is important to flush frequently to avoid
blood standing in the guide catheter. Guide
catheter-induced dissection is an uncommon complication of PCI, but when
it occurs, the outcome can be devastating. The exact
incidence remains unknown, but numerous case reports of
antegradae dissection into coronary artery, retrograde dissection into
the aortic root, subclavian or IMA dissection, dissection
into abdominal aorta or even the iliac artery are
available24. The best way to avoid guide catheter dissection is
meticulous attention to technique of guide catheter cannulation
and maneuvering the catheter strictly over guide wire
while insertion or removal from the body. Amplatz type of
guiding catheters and those with side-holes are especially prone
to causing dissections. A number of factors are associated
with increased risk for coronary artery dissection. Devlin and
co-workers demonstrated that majority of LMCA
dissections were due to contact of the catheter with the
plaque25. This highlights the importance of using catheters that
are appropriately sized, positioned and coaxially aligned
with the artery. The use of Amplatz-type catheters and
performance of PCI in patients with acute myocardial infarction were
also associated with guide catheter
dissections26 . Other factors that have been proposed include brisk catheter
manipulations, vigorous contrast injection, deep intubations of the
catheter within the coronary artery, variant anatomy of the
coronary ostia, and even vigorous, deep
inspiration 27-30. The guide catheter induced dissections can be avoided by using |
|
Guide Catheter Selection for Radial Intervention
The transradial approach to PCI, initially developed by a small group of dedicated pioneers, is now increasingly popular with interventionalists who aim to minimize complications while increasing patient comfort and aim for immediate mobilization32-33. The guide catheter chosen for radial interventions should have several characteristic features to enable a successful outcome of PCI. The catheter should provide optimal stiffness for optimal support, it should have contact on multiple sites of the aortic root, the primary curve of the guide should be flexible, the guide ought to have blunt angles and it should be coaxially aligned with the target vessel. The radial artery is one of the most spasmogenic arteries in the human body. Spasm can be precipitated by mechanical stimuli and so lesser the catheter manipulations, the less risk for spasm34. Various types of catheters are available for left coronary, right coronary and venous bypass grafts. Table 2. Femoral guide catheters are very adaptable to transradial route, JL and JR guide catheters can be used for intubating LCA and RCA, respectively. However, for cannulating LCA, downsizing by 0.5 is appropriate. For RCA interventions AR catheter may be used and AL and MP guides can be utilized for both vessels. When extra support is required EBU, XB, or Voda may be used.
Special Catheters for Radial Route: A range specific guide catheters Fajadet, Kimny, MUTA, IKARI, Barbeau's,
new long tip guiding catheters have been designed to give
optimum support and alignment35.
Table 2. Choice of Catheters for Interventions via Radial Artery
Left coronary
artery: Fajadet left, Kimny radial, MUTA left, IKARI left, EBU, Amplatz left (flexible),
Judkins left, Multipurpose / El Gamal
· Right coronary artery: Barbeau's, Fajadet Right, Kimny radial, MUTA right, IKARI right, Multipurpose / El Gamal, Judkins right, Amplatz right, Amplatz left
· Both left and right coronary arteries: Kimny radial, Multipurpose / El Gamal, Amplatz left
· Venous bypass grafts: Kimny radial, Multipurpose / El Gamal, Judkins right, Bypass graft catheters
References
1. Judkins M, Judkins E. Coronary arteriography and left ventriculography: Judkins technique. In: King SI, Douglas JJ (eds.). Coronary Arteriography and Angioplasty. New York: McGraw-Hill. 1985; pp. 182217.
2. Meier B. Percutaneous coronary intervention. In: Topol EJ (ed). Textbook of Cardiovascular Medicine, 2nd edition. 2002;pp. 16651676.
3. Meier B. The Guiding Catheter: The Most Underrated Asset to Coronary Angioplasty. 2005;17: 1-3.
4. Ikari Y,Nagaoka M, Kim JY, et al. The physics of guiding catheters for the left coronary artery in transfemoral and transradial interventions. Journal Invasive Cardiol. 2005;17 : 636-641.
5. Myler RK, Boucher RA, Cumberland DC, et al. Guiding catheter selection for
right coronary artery angioplasty. Cath. Cardiovasc. Diag. 1990;19(1): 58-67.
6. Mehta S, Margolis JR. Hockey Stick Guiding Catheter. J Interven Cardiol 1992;
5:331336.
7. Clark DA. Risks and benefits of the Arani curve guiding catheter for stenting of the right coronary artery: The value of experience. Cath. Cardiovasc. Interven. 1998;39(1): 96. 8. Safian RD, Freed M. Coronary Intervention: Preperation, equipment and technique. In Freed M, Grines C, Safian RD (eds): The New Manual of Interventional Cardiology. Birmingham,MI, Physician's Press, 1998;1-35. 9. Mehta S, Margolis JR, Traktman M, et al. Voda guiding catheter is superior to Amplatz guiding catheter for performing left circumflex PTCA. J Invasive Cardiol. 1994 Sep;6(7):229-33. 10. Hoang V, Urban P,Chatelain P, et al. Randomized evaluation of six French Voda-type guiding catheters for left coronary artery balloon angioplasty. Cath. Cardiovasc. Interven. 2005;35(1) :53-56. 11. Keelan, Paul C, Holmes, David R. Jr Interventional procedures in the management of congenital coronary anomalies in adults. Coronary Artery Disease. 2001;12(8):627-633. 12. Tan K, Sulke N, Taub N, et al. Clinical and lesion morphologic determinants of coronary angioplasty successvand complictions: Current experience. J Am Coll Cardiol 1995; 25: 855-65. 13. Ellis SG, Nandormael MG, Cowley MJ, et al. Coronarybmorphologic and clinical determinants of procedural outcome with angioplasty for multivessel disease. Implications for patient selection. Circulation 1990; 82: 1193-1202. 14. Flood RD, Popma JJ, Chuang YC, et al. Incidence, angiographic predictors, and clinical significance of coronary perforation occurring after new device angioplasty. J Am Coll Cardiol 1994; 23: 301A. 15. Holmes DR, Berden L, Simpson SG, et al. Abrupt closure: CAVEAT experience. J Am Coll Cardiol 1994; 23: 1 585 A. 16. Ohlow MA, von Korn H, Lauer B. Mother-and-baby technique for catheterization of the left coronary artery in a patient with a huge aneurysm of the ascending aorta. 2007;7: 524-525. 17. Grossman DE, Tuzcu EM, Simpfendorfer C, et al. Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty for shepard's crook right coronary artery stenosis. Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn 1989;15: 189-91. 18. Douglas JS. Percutaneous interventions in patients with prior coronary bypass surgery. In Topol EJ(eds.). Textbook of Interventional Cardiology. pp 317-44. 19. Nader RJ. Clinical Review of the Cordis 6F 3DRC VISTA BRITE TIP® Guiding Catheter. Clinical Update 2003;2E: 800-1148-51. 20. Noto TJ, Johnson LW, Krone R, et al. Cardiac catheterization 1990: a report of the Registry of the Society for Cardiac Angiography and Interventions. Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn. 1991;24:7583. 21. Sternby NH. Atherosclerosis in a defined population: an autopsy survey in Malmo, Sweden. Acta Pathol Microbiol Scand. 1968;(Suppl 194):1216. 22. Moldreen-Geronimus M, Merriam JC Jr. Cholesterol embolism: from pathological curiosity to clinical entity. Circulation. 1967;35:946953. 23. Keely EC, Grines CL. Scraping of aortic debris by coronary guiding catheters. A prospective evaluation of 1,000 cases. J Am Coll Cardiol, 1998; 32:1861-1865. 24. Brinker JA. Editorial comment: Geeez! Oh my God! Oops! #&*&††? Cathet Cardiovasc |
|
Diagn 1998;43:280281. 25. Devlin G, Lazzam L, Schwartz L. Mortality related to diagnostic cardiac catherization. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging (formerly Cardiac Imaging) 1997;13:379384. 26. Dunning DW, Kahn JK, Hawkins ET, O'Neill WW. Iatrogenic coronary artery dissections extending into and involving the aortic root. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2000;51:387393. 27. Jain D, Kurowski V, Katus HA, Richardt G. Catheter-induced dissection of the left main coronary artery, the nemesis of an invasive cardiologist. Zeitschrift fur Kardiologie 2002;91:840. 28. Awadalla H, Sabet S, Sebaie AE, et al. Catheter-induced left main dissection incidence, predisposition and therapeutic strategies: Experience from two sides of the hemisphere. J Invasive Cardiol 2005;17:233236. 29. Curtis MJ, Traboulsi M, Knudtson ML, Lester WM. Left main coronary artery dissection during cardiac catheterization. Can J Cardiol 1992;8:725728. |
30. Biel SI, Krone RJ. Left coronary artery dissection with an amplatz-shaped catheter. The role of vigorous inspiration during contrast injection. Chest 1984;86:640641. 31. Boyle AJ, Chan M, Dib J, et al. Catheter-Induced Coronary Artery Dissection: Risk Factors, Prevention and Management. Journal Invasive Cardiol.2006, 18(10) 500-3. 32. Kiemeneij F , Laarman GJ, Odekerken D, et al. A randomised comparison of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty by the radial, brachial and femoral approaches:the access study. J Am Coll Cardiol 1997;29:126975. 33. Kumar S, Anantharaman R, Das P, et al. Radial approach to day case intervention in coronary artery lesions (RADICAL): a single centre safety and feasibility study. Heart. 2004 November; 90(11): 13401341. 34. Motwani JG. Direct Coronary Stenting via the Radial Artery. 160 lesions in 118 consecutive patients. Heart 2001, 85: P53. 35. Ochiary M, Ikari Y, Yamaguchi T, et al. New long-tip guiding catheters designed for right transradial coronary interventions. Cathet Cardiovac Intervent 2000; 49:218-24. |
|