Overview of Contemporary Chronic Total Occlusion Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Techniques: A Narrative Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Despite the abundance of coronary chronic total occlusions (CTO) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) studies, the literature is not easy to digest for both general PCI operators and CTO PCI specialists because of the many varied terms used for approaches and inconsistency in terminology. This inconsistency makes it challenging to understand the advantages and disadvantages of these different approaches and, most importantly, their downstream clinical outcomes. Accordingly, we conducted a systematic review of all published studies on CTO PCI to describe techniques and algorithms used in the last decade to provide an overview on the efficacy and safety of contemporary CTO PCI techniques. METHODS: We performed a comprehensive search of the PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane library databases for manuscripts about PCI of CTOs. We included studies published between the years 2005 and 2019. We categorized studies into those using a single approach (antegrade, retrograde) and those with a prespecified algorithm (ie, hybrid approach). RESULTS: Fifty-five observational studies including 28,907 patients who underwent CTO were included in this review. CTO PCI generally carries low risk of major procedural complications, with angiographic success rates being higher in studies that used an algorithmic vs single technical approach. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review highlights the wide variation in definitions and practices in CTO PCI and calls for standardization in terminology and practice.

CONTEXTE: Malgré l'abondance d'études sur l'intervention coronarienne percutanée (ICP) en cas d'occlusion totale chronique (OTC), la littérature n'est pas facile à assimiler, tant pour les opérateurs généraux qui effectuent des ICP que pour les spécialistes des ICP en cas d'OTC, en raison des nombreux termes utilisés pour les approches et de l'incohérence sur le plan de la terminologie. Cette incohérence rend difficile la compréhension des avantages et des inconvénients de ces différentes approches et, surtout, de leurs résultats cliniques en aval. Nous avons donc procédé à une revue systématique de toutes les études publiées sur l'ICP en cas d'OTC afin de décrire les techniques et les algorithmes utilisés au cours de la dernière décennie et de donner un aperçu de l'efficacité et de l'innocuité des techniques contemporaines d'ICP en cas d'OTC. MÉTHODOLOGIE: Nous avons effectué une recherche exhaustive dans les bases de données PubMed, EMBASE et Cochrane Library pour trouver des articles sur l'ICP en cas d'OTC. Nous avons retenu les études publiées entre 2005 et 2019. Nous avons classé ces études en deux catégories : celles qui utilisent une seule approche (antérograde, rétrograde) et celles qui utilisent un algorithme prédéfini (approche hybride). RÉSULTATS: Cette revue portait sur 55 études observationnelles, pour un total de 28 907 patients présentant des OTC. L'ICP en cas d'OTC comporte généralement un faible risque de complications importantes liées aux interventions, les taux de réussite angiographique étant plus élevés pour les études où une approche algorithmique était utilisée que pour celles où l'on recourait à une approche technique unique. CONCLUSIONS: Cette revue systématique souligne la grande variation des définitions et des pratiques en matière d'ICP en cas d'OTC, ainsi que le besoin d'une normalisation de la terminologie et de la pratique.

Health Resource and Cost Savings Achieved in a Multidisciplinary Lung Cancer Clinic.

Background: Lung cancer (LC) care is resource and cost intensive. We launched a Multidisciplinary LC Clinic (MDC), where patients with a new LC diagnosis received concurrent oncology consultation, resulting in improved time to LC assessment and treatment. Here, we evaluate the impact of MDC on health resource utilization, patient and caregiver costs, and secondary patient benefits. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed patients in a rapid assessment clinic with a new LC diagnosis pre-MDC (September 2016-February 2017) and post-MDC implementation (February 2017-December 2018). Data are reported as means; unpaired t-tests and ANOVA were used to assess for significance. We also conducted a cost analysis. Resource utilization, out-of-pocket costs, procedure-related costs, and indirect costs were evaluated from the societal perspective and presented in 2019 Canadian dollars (CAD); multi-way worst/best case and threshold sensitivity analyses were conducted. Results: We reviewed 428 patients (78 traditional model, 350 MDC). Patients in the MDC model required significantly fewer oncology visits from LC diagnosis to first LC treatment (1.62 vs. 2.68, p < 0.001), which was significant for patients with stage 1, 3, and 4 disease. Compared with the traditional model, there was no change in mean biopsies/patient (1.32 traditional vs. 1.17 MDC, p = 0.18) or staging investigations/patient (2.24 traditional vs. 2.02 MDC, p = 0.20). Post-MDC, there was an increase in invasive mediastinal staging for patients with stage 2/3 LC (15.0% vs. 60.0%, p < 0.001). Over 22 months, MDC resulted in savings of CAD 48,389 including CAD 24,167 CAD in direct patient out-of-pocket expenses. For the threshold analyses, MDC was estimated to cost CAD 25,708 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY), considered to be below current willingness to pay thresholds (at CAD 80,000 per QALY). MDC also facilitated oncology assessment for 29 non-LC patients. Conclusions: An MDC led to a reduction in patient visits and direct patient and caregiver costs.