RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: We hypothesized that some coronary sinus (CS) anatomies allow a more straightforward CS Reducer (CSR) implantation. BACKGROUND: Recent decades have seen a rise in patients with chronic angina. When complete revascularization and maximal medical therapy fail to reduce symptoms, CSR has become a new therapeutic option. METHODS: We identified a classical C-shape-a near horizontal course of the proximal portion of a circular CS-in a retrospective analysis of 47 CSR implantations and compared the procedural time, fluoroscopic time, contrast use, presence of valves or bifurcations and procedural complications with the non-C-shape CS anatomy. RESULTS: We found a significant difference in procedural (20.0 [19.0-24.7] min vs. 24.5 [20.7-51.0] min; p = .028 and fluoroscopic time (9.5 [7.5-14.5] min vs. 11.0 [7.9-30.0] min; p = .016). There was no significant difference in contrast use. The presence of bifurcations or valves along the CS course did not influence the procedural timings. CONCLUSION: This study is the first systematic evaluation of CS anatomy and its procedural implications. We identified a favorable C-shape anatomy which allows for a more straightforward implantation. Operators should be aware of the different implications of CS anatomy, their influence on guiding catheter stability and overall procedure complexity.