PriMera Scientific Medicine and Public Health (ISSN: 2833-5627)

Editorial Note

Volume 7 Issue 4

Editorial Note: Abrupt Vessel Closure in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention - Lessons from the Cath Lab

Rohit Mody*

October 06, 2025

DOI : 10.56831/PSMPH-07-250

View PDF

Abstract

The past thirty years have seen a shift in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) from simple balloon angioplasty to modern day practices characterized by drug eluting stents (DES) along with powerful antiplatelet medications and sophisticated intra-vascular imaging. With this progress, complication rates have steadily declined. Yet, the specter of abrupt vessel closure (AVC) continues to haunt the catheterization laboratory. Though the incidence of AVC has fallen from approximately 3% in the balloon angioplasty era to 0.3% in the DES era [1], its occurrence remains a life-threatening challenge.

AVC is defined as the sudden cessation of antegrade coronary blood flow during or immediately after PCI. It is not only catastrophic in its clinical consequences but also a litmus test of the operator’s preparedness, judgment, and technical skill. In this editorial note, we revisit AVC from a contemporary lens, distilling mechanistic insights, risk factors, management strategies, and pearls of wisdom that every interventional cardiologist must carry into the lab.

References

  1. Ellis SG., et al. “Angiographic and clinical predictors of acute closure after native vessel coronary angioplasty”. Circulation 82 (1990): 731-40.
  2. Holmes DR., et al. “Restenosis after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA): a report from the PTCA registry of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute”. Circulation 83 (1991): 927-36.
  3. Lefèvre T., et al. “Coronary angioplasty in acute myocardial infarction: clinical and angiographic results”. J Am Coll Cardiol 19 (1992): 926-33.
  4. Brener SJ., et al. “Frequency and long-term impact of recurrent ischemia after successful percutaneous coronary intervention”. Am J Cardiol 68 (1991): 1131-5.
  5. Ellis SG., et al. “Angiographic and clinical predictors of acute closure after native vessel coronary angioplasty”. Circulation 82 (1990): 731-40.
  6. Dautov R., et al. “Outcomes of primary percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with large thrombus burden”. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 88 (2016): 1080-7.
  7. Kawasaki T., et al. “Angiographic and clinical outcomes of manual thrombus aspiration in primary percutaneous coronary intervention: evidence from a large Japanese registry”. Euro Intervention 8 (2013): 1445-53.
  8. Stone GW., et al. “Comparison of angioplasty with stenting, or both, in acute myocardial infarction”. N Engl J Med 346 (2002): 975-66.
  9. Khan M., et al. “Safety and efficacy of manual thrombus aspiration in patients undergoing primary PCI”. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 73 (2009): 143-50.
  10. Ong P., et al. “Diagnosis of coronary microvascular dysfunction in the clinic”. Circulation 135 (2017): 2054-68.
  11. Niccoli G., et al. “Myocardial no-reflow in humans”. Circulation 119 (2009): 2107-16.
  12. Doll JA., et al. “Management of complications during percutaneous coronary intervention: insights from the Seattle PCI Complication Conference”. Seattle PCI Complication Conference (2019).
  13. Ali ZA., et al. “Optical coherence tomography compared with intravascular ultrasound and angiography to guide coronary stent implantation (ILUMIEN III: OPTIMIZE PCI): a randomized controlled trial”. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 9 (2016): 211-23.