Abstract

AIMS:

Comparison of magnetic guidewire navigation in percutaneous coronary intervention (magnetic PCI) across distal and/or complex lesions versus conventional navigation (conventional PCI).

METHODS AND RESULTS:

Forty-seven consecutive patients (age 61 +/- 10 yr) undergoing elective single vessel magnetic PCI for distal and/or complex lesions were matched by age and lesion location with 45 patients undergoing conventional PCI (age 63 +/- 10 yr). Technical success rate was defined as an intraluminal wire position distal to the stenosis. Procedural outcome and costs were evaluated. Baseline demographics and angiographic characteristics of the two groups were similar. The technical success rate did not differ between magnetic and conventional PCI (95.7 vs 97.8%; p = 1.00). Significantly shorter procedural and fluoroscopy time were observed for magnetic compared to conventional PCI (29.9 +/- 17.6 vs 41.1 +/- 21 min, p = 0.007; 7.5 +/- 7.3 vs 16.1 +/- 22.4 min, p = 0.02 respectively). Less contrast was used in the magnetic PCI group (58 ml/patient; P = 0.02). These advantages resulted in a mean estimated saving of 1400 euro per patient (P < 0.001). Advantages of procedural outcome were even more pronounced in the ACC/AHA lesion class C subgroup.

CONCLUSIONS:

Magnetic compared to conventional PCI is an attractive novel technique that proved to be feasible and safe and might be faster in distal and especially complex lesions.