Clinical review for general practice

ISSN (Print) 2713-2552
ISSN (Online) 2782-5671
  • Home
  • about
  • archives
  • contacts
left
FULLSCREEN > Archive > 2026 > Vol 7, №5 (2026) > Comparison of very long-term clinical outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention versus optimal medical therapy in patients with coronary chronic total occlusion

Comparison of very long-term clinical outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention versus optimal medical therapy in patients with coronary chronic total occlusion

Pavel Ya. Skovran , Avtandil M. Babunashvili , Andrey S. Zhuravlev , Sergey P. Semitko , Nino V. Tsereteli , David G. Ioseliani

For citation:


  • Abstract
  • About the Author
  • References

Abstract

Background. Chronic total occlusion (CTO) of a coronary artery represents one of the most complex forms of coronary artery disease, and the optimal treatment strategy remains controversial.
Objective. To compare very long-term (≥5 years) clinical outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention plus optimal medical therapy (PCI+OMT) versus OMT alone in patients with chronic coronary syndrome and angiographically confirmed CTO.
Materials and methods. This multicenter retrospective study included 100 patients with coronary artery disease and angiographically confirmed CTO hospitalized between 2005 and 2018. Preprocedural assessment comprised laboratory testing, noninvasive ischemia evaluation, electrocardiography, and echocardiography. Invasive assessment was performed using bilateral coronary angiography with evaluation according to the SYNTAX and J-CTO scores, as well as the Werner and Rentrop classifications. Patients were allocated into two equal groups: PCI+OMT and OMT alone. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), defined as all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and stroke. Secondary endpoints included individual MACE components, cardiovascular-related hospitalizations, clinical status (Canadian Cardiovascular Society – CCS angina class and NYHA functional class), and echocardiographic parameters (left ventricular ejection fraction, end-diastolic and end-systolic volumes).
Results. The median follow-up was 68 months (Q1–Q3: 33.6–109; range 12–240 months). No significant differences were observed between groups in MACE (p=1,000), all-cause mortality (p=0,842), myocardial infarction (p=0,855), or stroke (p=0,978). Recurrent hospitalization rates were similar (p=0,069). No between-group differences in CCS class were detected (p=0,152); however, angina progression occurred in the OMT group p=0,014). Echocardiographic parameters did not differ significantly, although a reduction in left ventricular ejection fraction was observed in the restenosis subgroup (p=0,038).
Conclusions. In very long-term follow-up, PCI for CTO was not associated with improved cardiovascular outcomes compared with OMT alone. Conservative therapy was associated with progression of angina symptoms.
Keywords: chronic total occlusion, percutaneous coronary intervention, optimal medical therapy, major adverse cardiovascular events, long-term outcomes.

About the Author

Pavel Ya. Skovran , Avtandil M. Babunashvili , Avtandil M. Babunashvili , Andrey S. Zhuravlev , Sergey P. Semitko , Nino V. Tsereteli , David G. Ioseliani
Pavel Ya. Skovran1, Avtandil M. Babunashvili1,2, Andrey S. Zhuravlev1, Sergey P. Semitko1, Nino V. Tsereteli1, David G. Ioseliani1

1 Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), Moscow, Russia
2 Center for Endosurgery and Lithotripsy, Moscow, Russia

References

1. Sapontis J, Salisbury AC, Yeh RW et al. Early procedural and health status outcomes after chronic total occlusion angioplasty: a report from the OPEN-CTO registry (Outcomes, Patient Health Status, and Efficiency in Chronic Total Occlusion Hybrid Procedures). JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2017;10(15):1523-34. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2017.05.065
2. Neumann FJ, Sousa-Uva M, Ahlsson A et al. 2018 ESC/EACTS guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur Heart J 2019;40(2):87-165.
3. Lawton JS, Tamis-Holland JE, Bangalore S et al. 2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI guideline for coronary artery revascularization. J Am Coll Cardiol 2022;79(2):e21-e129.
4. Werner GS, Surber R, Kuethe F et al. Collaterals and the recovery of left ventricular function after recanalization of a chronic total coronary occlusion. Am Heart J 2005;149(1):129-37.
5. Grantham JA, Marso SP, Spertus J et al. Chronic total occlusion angioplasty in the United States. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2009;2(6):479-86.
6. George S, Cockburn J, Clayton TC et al. Long-term follow-up of elective chronic total coronary occlusion angioplasty: analysis from the U.K. Central Cardiac Audit Database. J Am Coll Cardiol 2014;64(3):235-43.
7. Valenti R, Migliorini A, Signorini U et al. Impact of complete revascularization with percutaneous coronary intervention on survival in patients with at least one chronic total occlusion. Eur Heart J 2008;29(19):2336-42.
8. Valenti R, Marrani M, Cantini G et al. Impact of chronic total occlusion revascularization in patients with acute myocardial infarction treated by primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Am J Cardiol 2014;114(12):1794-800.
9. Serruys PW, Onuma Y, Garg S et al. Assessment of the SYNTAX score in the SYNTAX study. EuroIntervention 2009;5(1):50-6. DOI: 10.4244/eijv5i1a9
10. Rentrop KP, Cohen M, Blanke H, Phillips RA. Changes in collateral channel filling immediately after controlled coronary artery occlusion. Circulation 1985;71(6):1120-7.
11. Werner GS, Ferrari M, Heinke S et al. Angiographic assessment of collateral connections in comparison with invasively determined collateral function in chronic coronary occlusions. Circulation 2003;107(15):1972-7. DOI: 10.1161/01.CIR.0000061953.72662.3A
12. Morino Y, Abe M, Morimoto T et al. Predicting successful guidewire crossing through chronic total occlusion of native coronary lesions within 30 minutes: the J-CTO score. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2011;4(2):213-21.
13. Leite L, Carlos T, Campos G et al. Effect of percutaneous coronary intervention on chronic total occlusions with documented viability or ischemia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Cardiovasc Disord 2025;(25):54. DOI: 10.1186/s12872-025-05405-0
14. Werner GS, Martin-Yuste V, Louvard Y et al. A randomized multicentre trial to compare revascularization with optimal medical therapy for the treatment of chronic total coronary occlusions. Eur Heart J 2018;39(26):2484-93. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehy220
15. Juricic SA et al. Randomized controlled comparison of optimal medical therapy with percutaneous recanalization of chronic total occlusioабс. (COMET-CTO). Int Heart J 2021;62(1):16-22. DOI: 10.1536/ihj.20-427
16. Van Veelen A, Elias J, van Dongen IM et al. Ten-year outcome of recanalization or medical therapy for concomitant chronic total occlusion after myocardial infarction. J Am Heart Assoc 2024;(13):e030300. DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.123.033556
17. Lee SW, Ahn JM, Park DW et al. Randomized trial evaluating percutaneous coronary intervention for the treatment of chronic total occlusion: the DECISION-CTO trial. Circulation 2019;139(14):1674-83. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.118.031313
18. Coerkamp CF et al. Long-term survival and angina after chronic total occlusion percutaneous coronary intervention compared with medical therapy: a meta-analysis. J Am Heart Assoc 2024;(13):e035671. DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.124.035671

For citation:Skovran P.Ya., Babunashvili A.M., Zhuravlev A.S., Semitko S.P., Tsereteli N.V., Ioseliani D.G. Comparison of very long-term clinical outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention versus optimal medical therapy in patients with coronary chronic total occlusion. Clinical review for general practice. 2026; 7 (5): 30–36 (In Russ.). DOI: 10.47407/kr2026.7.5.00836


All accepted articles publish licensed under a Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) which allows users to read, copy, distribute and make derivative works for non-commercial purposes from the material, as long as the author of the original work is cited properly.

  • About
  • Editorial board
  • Ethics
  • For authors
  • Author fees
  • Peer review
  • Contacts

oa
crossref
анри


  Indexing

Scopus
doaj
elibrary

Address of the Editorial Office:

127055, Moscow, s/m 37

Correspondence address:

115054, Moscow, Zhukov passage, 19, fl. 2, room XI


Managing Editor:

+7 (495) 926-29-83

id@con-med.ru