Longitudinal Geographic Miss (LGM) in Robotic Assisted Versus Manual Percutaneous Coronary Interventions

Bezerra, Hiram G.; Mehanna, Emile; Vetrovec, George W.; Costa, Marco A.; Weisz, Giora

doi:10.1111/joic.12231

Cited by 46 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Further, the patients enrolled in the CORA-PCI trial were a diverse population; roughly 20% presented with acute coronary syndrome, and a substantial num- to M-PCI. 16 Longitudinal geographic miss is in turn associated with higher target lesion revascularization, 17 but no such benefit of robotic PCI was observed in the current study, likely due to it being underpowered to address such a difference.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 54%

“…This long‐term follow‐up study of the original CORA‐PCI study provides confirmation that robotic PCI can be performed with high technical success and leads to short‐ and intermediate‐term outcomes which are comparable to the manual approach. Additional potential benefits unique to the robotic platform with its ability to perform micromanipulation of the balloon and stent delivery system in the coronary artery lower the incidence of longitudinal geographic miss when compared to M‐PCI . Longitudinal geographic miss is in turn associated with higher target lesion revascularization, but no such benefit of robotic PCI was observed in the current study, likely due to it being underpowered to address such a difference.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 71%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Complex robotic compared to manual coronary interventions: 6‐ and 12‐month outcomes

Walters

Reeves

Patel

et al. 2018

Cathet Cardio Intervent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives To assess the long‐term safety and efficacy of robotic percutaneous coronary revascularization for use in complex coronary lesions. Background Robotically assisted percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is safe and feasible in simple coronary lesions and has excellent short‐term procedural and clinical outcomes for complex lesions; however, long‐term safety and efficacy outcomes are unknown. Methods A total of 103 consecutive patients underwent a total of 108 robotic (R)‐PCI procedures (age 68.1; 78.3% male) over 18 months, and 210 patients underwent a total of 226 manual (M)‐PCI procedures (age 67.5; 78.1% male) during the same period. Patients were subsequently followed and both 6‐month and 12‐month major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), comprised of any death, stroke, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization, are reported and compared. Results There was no difference between the two groups with regard to overall MACE at 6 months (R‐PCI 5.8% vs. M‐PCI 3.3%, P = 0.51) or at 12 months (R‐PCI 7.8% vs. M‐PCI 8.1%, P = 0.92). There was no difference between the individual components of the primary combined endpoint at either time point. No access site complications occurred in either cohort that met BARC III or higher criteria. Conclusions At the 6‐ and 12‐month time points following R‐PCI, no difference in clinical outcomes or safety measures was observed as compared to M‐PCI.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 54%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 71%

Complex robotic compared to manual coronary interventions: 6‐ and 12‐month outcomes

Walters

Reeves

Patel

et al. 2018

Cathet Cardio Intervent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similar numbers were shown when compared with objective robotic measurement . Although this information needs to be confirmed with prospective clinical data, by improving accuracy of lesion‐length assessment, robot‐assisted PCI hold the potential to reduce the risk of in‐stent restenosis and to improve patient outcomes . The impact of precise robotic lesion‐length measurement on stent length selection was studied in 60 consecutive patients by Campbell and colleagues.…”

Section: Possible Benefits Of Robot‐assisted Pcimentioning

confidence: 76%

Current and Future Use of Robotic Devices to Perform Percutaneous Coronary Interventions: A Review

Maor

Eleid

Gulati

et al. 2017

JAHA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Experience with these indications has shown that the key benefits of robotic assistance include increased procedural and technical accuracy, as well as reduced radiation dose during fluoroscopic procedures. It also offers the potential for truly ‘remote’ procedures 3 9–11…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

First-in-human, robotic-assisted neuroendovascular intervention

Pereira

Cancelliere

Nicholson

et al. 2020

J NeuroIntervent Surg

105

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Robotic-assisted technology has been used as a tool to enhance open and minimally invasive surgeries as well as percutaneous coronary and peripheral vascular interventions. It offers many potential benefits, including increased procedural and technical accuracy as well as reduced radiation dose during fluoroscopic procedures. It also offers the potential for truly “remote” procedures. Despite these benefits, robotic technology has not yet been used in the neuroendovascular field, aside from diagnostic cerebral angiography. Here, we report the first robotic-assisted, therapeutic, neuroendovascular intervention performed in a human. This was a stent-assisted coiling procedure to treat a large basilar aneurysm. All intracranial steps, including stent placement and coil deployment, were performed with assistance from the CorPath<sup>©</sup> GRX Robotic System (Corindus, a Siemens Healthineers Company, Waltham, MA, USA). This represents a major milestone in the treatment of neurovascular disease and opens the doors for the development of remote robotic neuroendovascular procedures.

show abstract

Longitudinal Geographic Miss (LGM) in Robotic Assisted Versus Manual Percutaneous Coronary Interventions

Abstract: Robotic-assisted PCI had significantly lower incidence of LGM compared to standard M-PCI. Reducing LGM potentially improves long-term clinical outcomes through reduction in MACE.

Cited by 46 publications

References 10 publications

Complex robotic compared to manual coronary interventions: 6‐ and 12‐month outcomes

Complex robotic compared to manual coronary interventions: 6‐ and 12‐month outcomes

Current and Future Use of Robotic Devices to Perform Percutaneous Coronary Interventions: A Review

First-in-human, robotic-assisted neuroendovascular intervention

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About