Back to Cardiology Articles

Submitted by Dr. Yasser Mokhtar, MD. Dept. of internal medicine. School of medicine, University of South Dakota.

12th May, 2001

Percutaneous in-situ coronary venous arterialization is a new less invasive alternative to CABG.

prntfrnd.gif (30x26 -- 1309 bytes)printer friendly version
  Transesophageal echo: uses, techniques and complications
Cardiology Discussion board

Percutaneous in-situ coronary venous arterialization (PICVA) is gaining alot of attention recently. Especially after its initial success in saving the life of a patient suffering from cardiac infarction who was not candidate for CABG. However, as successful and promising as everything may seem it is way too early to decide whether it shows a survival benefit over traditional CABG.

Pros and Cons

First of all this procedure has only been used on one human being in Germany and was done almost one year ago. However, it has been tested on pigs and has showed a survival benefit over CABG.

Secondly, the technique uses the coronary veins which are rarely diseased as opposed to other percutaneous techniques which use the saphenous vein or other arterial conduits that are the seat of plaques.

Lastly, the technique and devices used are still under development.

Candidates for PICVA

Patients who can potentially benefit from the procedure include those who are candidates for various types of laser-based transmyocardial laser revascularization procedures; re-do CABG patients; patients with chronic total occlusions; and patients who are candidates for gene therapy.

Are you a Doctor, Pharmacist, PA or a Nurse?

Join the Doctors Lounge online medical community

  • Editorial activities: Publish, peer review, edit online articles.

  • Ask a Doctor Teams: Respond to patient questions and discuss challenging presentations with other members.

Doctors Lounge Membership Application

Tools & Services: Follow DoctorsLounge on Twitter Follow us on Twitter | RSS News | Newsletter | Contact us