Safety and effectiveness of introducing a robotic-assisted percutaneous coronary intervention program in a tertiary center: a prospective study

Robotic-assisted percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is a novel technology that permits remote operation of interventional devices. However, little is known about the safety and effectiveness of introducing a robotic PCI program in a hospital already experienced in traditional coronary angiopla...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy 2022-02, Vol.12 (1), p.67-76
Hauptverfasser: Lemos, Pedro A, Franken, Marcelo, Mariani, Jr, Jose, Caixeta, Adriano, Almeida, Breno O, Pitta, Fabio G, Prado, Guy F A, Garzon, Stefano, Ramalho, Felipe, Albuquerque, Gabriel, Gomes, Ivanise M, de Oliveira, Irisvaldo S, Valle, Leonardo, Galastri, Leonardo, Affonso, Breno B, Nasser, Felipe, Garcia, Rodrigo G
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 76
container_issue 1
container_start_page 67
container_title Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy
container_volume 12
creator Lemos, Pedro A
Franken, Marcelo
Mariani, Jr, Jose
Caixeta, Adriano
Almeida, Breno O
Pitta, Fabio G
Prado, Guy F A
Garzon, Stefano
Ramalho, Felipe
Albuquerque, Gabriel
Gomes, Ivanise M
de Oliveira, Irisvaldo S
Valle, Leonardo
Galastri, Leonardo
Affonso, Breno B
Nasser, Felipe
Garcia, Rodrigo G
description Robotic-assisted percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is a novel technology that permits remote operation of interventional devices. However, little is known about the safety and effectiveness of introducing a robotic PCI program in a hospital already experienced in traditional coronary angioplasty. Prospective single-arm survey to assess the safety and effectiveness of robotic-assisted PCI in comparison to pre-defined performance goals. The study cohort comprised all consecutive cases treated with robotic PCI since its introduction. The safety primary endpoint was a composite of (I) overall death or (II) non-fatal adverse events related to target vessel complications (stent thrombosis, myocardial infarction, vessel perforation or cardiac tamponade, or repeat invasive treatment) during the index hospitalization. The efficacy primary endpoint was robotic-assisted procedural success, a composite of (I) successful dilatation of the target lesion and (II) successful robotic assistance, defined as absent non-planned manual conversion. A total of 83 patients and 112 lesions were prospectively enrolled. The rate of angiographic success was 99.1%. From these, 97 lesions (86.6%) were treated with only robotic PCI or with hybrid according to the pre-interventional plan. The rates of efficacy and safety primary endpoints were 85.7% and 2.4% respectively (P
doi_str_mv 10.21037/cdt-21-442
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>pubmed_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8898692</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>35282671</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c447t-4f4671e23e515cbb313ee9ebcef657dc9486ebfda075be2a83b401e5fd6046553</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpVUU1LAzEQDaJYqT15l9xldfO5Ww-CFL-g4EE9L9lkUiPtZkmyhf4K_7Kp1aK5ZHjz5s0bHkJnpLykpGTVlTapoKTgnB6gE0opK5iU5eG-FnSEJjF-lPnVgtSSHqMRE7SmsiIn6PNFWUgbrDqDwVrQya2hgxixt9h1KXgzaNctsMLBtz45XagYXUxgcA9BD0l14IeItQ--U2GzHYKQNZLzHe6DXwS1ymAWyHhyW4qGLec6Q7kf-91SHNNgNqfoyKplhMnPP0Zv93evs8di_vzwNLudF5rzKhXc8mwfKANBhG5bRhjAFFoNVorK6CmvJbTWqLISLVBVs5aXBIQ1suRSCDZGNzvdfmhXYLaOglo2fXCr7LDxyjX_O517bxZ-3dT1tJZTmgUudgI6nxAD2P0sKZvvaJocTa6aHE1mn_9dt-f-BsG-ABrqkEk</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Safety and effectiveness of introducing a robotic-assisted percutaneous coronary intervention program in a tertiary center: a prospective study</title><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Lemos, Pedro A ; Franken, Marcelo ; Mariani, Jr, Jose ; Caixeta, Adriano ; Almeida, Breno O ; Pitta, Fabio G ; Prado, Guy F A ; Garzon, Stefano ; Ramalho, Felipe ; Albuquerque, Gabriel ; Gomes, Ivanise M ; de Oliveira, Irisvaldo S ; Valle, Leonardo ; Galastri, Leonardo ; Affonso, Breno B ; Nasser, Felipe ; Garcia, Rodrigo G</creator><creatorcontrib>Lemos, Pedro A ; Franken, Marcelo ; Mariani, Jr, Jose ; Caixeta, Adriano ; Almeida, Breno O ; Pitta, Fabio G ; Prado, Guy F A ; Garzon, Stefano ; Ramalho, Felipe ; Albuquerque, Gabriel ; Gomes, Ivanise M ; de Oliveira, Irisvaldo S ; Valle, Leonardo ; Galastri, Leonardo ; Affonso, Breno B ; Nasser, Felipe ; Garcia, Rodrigo G</creatorcontrib><description>Robotic-assisted percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is a novel technology that permits remote operation of interventional devices. However, little is known about the safety and effectiveness of introducing a robotic PCI program in a hospital already experienced in traditional coronary angioplasty. Prospective single-arm survey to assess the safety and effectiveness of robotic-assisted PCI in comparison to pre-defined performance goals. The study cohort comprised all consecutive cases treated with robotic PCI since its introduction. The safety primary endpoint was a composite of (I) overall death or (II) non-fatal adverse events related to target vessel complications (stent thrombosis, myocardial infarction, vessel perforation or cardiac tamponade, or repeat invasive treatment) during the index hospitalization. The efficacy primary endpoint was robotic-assisted procedural success, a composite of (I) successful dilatation of the target lesion and (II) successful robotic assistance, defined as absent non-planned manual conversion. A total of 83 patients and 112 lesions were prospectively enrolled. The rate of angiographic success was 99.1%. From these, 97 lesions (86.6%) were treated with only robotic PCI or with hybrid according to the pre-interventional plan. The rates of efficacy and safety primary endpoints were 85.7% and 2.4% respectively (P&lt;0.01 for non-inferior to the pre-defined performance threshold). Introduction of robotic-assisted PCI in a tertiary center was associated with safe and effective results, comparable to pre-defined goals of optimal performance.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2223-3652</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2223-3660</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.21037/cdt-21-442</identifier><identifier>PMID: 35282671</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>China (Republic : 1949- ): AME Publishing Company</publisher><subject>Original</subject><ispartof>Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy, 2022-02, Vol.12 (1), p.67-76</ispartof><rights>2022 Cardiovascular Diagnosis and Therapy. All rights reserved.</rights><rights>2022 Cardiovascular Diagnosis and Therapy. All rights reserved. 2022 Cardiovascular Diagnosis and Therapy.</rights><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c447t-4f4671e23e515cbb313ee9ebcef657dc9486ebfda075be2a83b401e5fd6046553</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8898692/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8898692/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,881,27901,27902,53766,53768</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35282671$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Lemos, Pedro A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Franken, Marcelo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mariani, Jr, Jose</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Caixeta, Adriano</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Almeida, Breno O</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pitta, Fabio G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Prado, Guy F A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Garzon, Stefano</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ramalho, Felipe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Albuquerque, Gabriel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gomes, Ivanise M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Oliveira, Irisvaldo S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Valle, Leonardo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Galastri, Leonardo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Affonso, Breno B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nasser, Felipe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Garcia, Rodrigo G</creatorcontrib><title>Safety and effectiveness of introducing a robotic-assisted percutaneous coronary intervention program in a tertiary center: a prospective study</title><title>Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy</title><addtitle>Cardiovasc Diagn Ther</addtitle><description>Robotic-assisted percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is a novel technology that permits remote operation of interventional devices. However, little is known about the safety and effectiveness of introducing a robotic PCI program in a hospital already experienced in traditional coronary angioplasty. Prospective single-arm survey to assess the safety and effectiveness of robotic-assisted PCI in comparison to pre-defined performance goals. The study cohort comprised all consecutive cases treated with robotic PCI since its introduction. The safety primary endpoint was a composite of (I) overall death or (II) non-fatal adverse events related to target vessel complications (stent thrombosis, myocardial infarction, vessel perforation or cardiac tamponade, or repeat invasive treatment) during the index hospitalization. The efficacy primary endpoint was robotic-assisted procedural success, a composite of (I) successful dilatation of the target lesion and (II) successful robotic assistance, defined as absent non-planned manual conversion. A total of 83 patients and 112 lesions were prospectively enrolled. The rate of angiographic success was 99.1%. From these, 97 lesions (86.6%) were treated with only robotic PCI or with hybrid according to the pre-interventional plan. The rates of efficacy and safety primary endpoints were 85.7% and 2.4% respectively (P&lt;0.01 for non-inferior to the pre-defined performance threshold). Introduction of robotic-assisted PCI in a tertiary center was associated with safe and effective results, comparable to pre-defined goals of optimal performance.</description><subject>Original</subject><issn>2223-3652</issn><issn>2223-3660</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpVUU1LAzEQDaJYqT15l9xldfO5Ww-CFL-g4EE9L9lkUiPtZkmyhf4K_7Kp1aK5ZHjz5s0bHkJnpLykpGTVlTapoKTgnB6gE0opK5iU5eG-FnSEJjF-lPnVgtSSHqMRE7SmsiIn6PNFWUgbrDqDwVrQya2hgxixt9h1KXgzaNctsMLBtz45XagYXUxgcA9BD0l14IeItQ--U2GzHYKQNZLzHe6DXwS1ymAWyHhyW4qGLec6Q7kf-91SHNNgNqfoyKplhMnPP0Zv93evs8di_vzwNLudF5rzKhXc8mwfKANBhG5bRhjAFFoNVorK6CmvJbTWqLISLVBVs5aXBIQ1suRSCDZGNzvdfmhXYLaOglo2fXCr7LDxyjX_O517bxZ-3dT1tJZTmgUudgI6nxAD2P0sKZvvaJocTa6aHE1mn_9dt-f-BsG-ABrqkEk</recordid><startdate>202202</startdate><enddate>202202</enddate><creator>Lemos, Pedro A</creator><creator>Franken, Marcelo</creator><creator>Mariani, Jr, Jose</creator><creator>Caixeta, Adriano</creator><creator>Almeida, Breno O</creator><creator>Pitta, Fabio G</creator><creator>Prado, Guy F A</creator><creator>Garzon, Stefano</creator><creator>Ramalho, Felipe</creator><creator>Albuquerque, Gabriel</creator><creator>Gomes, Ivanise M</creator><creator>de Oliveira, Irisvaldo S</creator><creator>Valle, Leonardo</creator><creator>Galastri, Leonardo</creator><creator>Affonso, Breno B</creator><creator>Nasser, Felipe</creator><creator>Garcia, Rodrigo G</creator><general>AME Publishing Company</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>202202</creationdate><title>Safety and effectiveness of introducing a robotic-assisted percutaneous coronary intervention program in a tertiary center: a prospective study</title><author>Lemos, Pedro A ; Franken, Marcelo ; Mariani, Jr, Jose ; Caixeta, Adriano ; Almeida, Breno O ; Pitta, Fabio G ; Prado, Guy F A ; Garzon, Stefano ; Ramalho, Felipe ; Albuquerque, Gabriel ; Gomes, Ivanise M ; de Oliveira, Irisvaldo S ; Valle, Leonardo ; Galastri, Leonardo ; Affonso, Breno B ; Nasser, Felipe ; Garcia, Rodrigo G</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c447t-4f4671e23e515cbb313ee9ebcef657dc9486ebfda075be2a83b401e5fd6046553</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Original</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lemos, Pedro A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Franken, Marcelo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mariani, Jr, Jose</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Caixeta, Adriano</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Almeida, Breno O</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pitta, Fabio G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Prado, Guy F A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Garzon, Stefano</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ramalho, Felipe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Albuquerque, Gabriel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gomes, Ivanise M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Oliveira, Irisvaldo S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Valle, Leonardo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Galastri, Leonardo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Affonso, Breno B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nasser, Felipe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Garcia, Rodrigo G</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lemos, Pedro A</au><au>Franken, Marcelo</au><au>Mariani, Jr, Jose</au><au>Caixeta, Adriano</au><au>Almeida, Breno O</au><au>Pitta, Fabio G</au><au>Prado, Guy F A</au><au>Garzon, Stefano</au><au>Ramalho, Felipe</au><au>Albuquerque, Gabriel</au><au>Gomes, Ivanise M</au><au>de Oliveira, Irisvaldo S</au><au>Valle, Leonardo</au><au>Galastri, Leonardo</au><au>Affonso, Breno B</au><au>Nasser, Felipe</au><au>Garcia, Rodrigo G</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Safety and effectiveness of introducing a robotic-assisted percutaneous coronary intervention program in a tertiary center: a prospective study</atitle><jtitle>Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy</jtitle><addtitle>Cardiovasc Diagn Ther</addtitle><date>2022-02</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>12</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>67</spage><epage>76</epage><pages>67-76</pages><issn>2223-3652</issn><eissn>2223-3660</eissn><abstract>Robotic-assisted percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is a novel technology that permits remote operation of interventional devices. However, little is known about the safety and effectiveness of introducing a robotic PCI program in a hospital already experienced in traditional coronary angioplasty. Prospective single-arm survey to assess the safety and effectiveness of robotic-assisted PCI in comparison to pre-defined performance goals. The study cohort comprised all consecutive cases treated with robotic PCI since its introduction. The safety primary endpoint was a composite of (I) overall death or (II) non-fatal adverse events related to target vessel complications (stent thrombosis, myocardial infarction, vessel perforation or cardiac tamponade, or repeat invasive treatment) during the index hospitalization. The efficacy primary endpoint was robotic-assisted procedural success, a composite of (I) successful dilatation of the target lesion and (II) successful robotic assistance, defined as absent non-planned manual conversion. A total of 83 patients and 112 lesions were prospectively enrolled. The rate of angiographic success was 99.1%. From these, 97 lesions (86.6%) were treated with only robotic PCI or with hybrid according to the pre-interventional plan. The rates of efficacy and safety primary endpoints were 85.7% and 2.4% respectively (P&lt;0.01 for non-inferior to the pre-defined performance threshold). Introduction of robotic-assisted PCI in a tertiary center was associated with safe and effective results, comparable to pre-defined goals of optimal performance.</abstract><cop>China (Republic : 1949- )</cop><pub>AME Publishing Company</pub><pmid>35282671</pmid><doi>10.21037/cdt-21-442</doi><tpages>10</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2223-3652
ispartof Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy, 2022-02, Vol.12 (1), p.67-76
issn 2223-3652
2223-3660
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8898692
source Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; PubMed Central
subjects Original
title Safety and effectiveness of introducing a robotic-assisted percutaneous coronary intervention program in a tertiary center: a prospective study
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-06T18%3A57%3A23IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-pubmed_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Safety%20and%20effectiveness%20of%20introducing%20a%20robotic-assisted%20percutaneous%20coronary%20intervention%20program%20in%20a%20tertiary%20center:%20a%20prospective%20study&rft.jtitle=Cardiovascular%20diagnosis%20and%20therapy&rft.au=Lemos,%20Pedro%20A&rft.date=2022-02&rft.volume=12&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=67&rft.epage=76&rft.pages=67-76&rft.issn=2223-3652&rft.eissn=2223-3660&rft_id=info:doi/10.21037/cdt-21-442&rft_dat=%3Cpubmed_cross%3E35282671%3C/pubmed_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/35282671&rfr_iscdi=true