Comparison of Outcomes Between 1-and 2-Stent Techniques for Medina Classification 0.0.1 Coronary Bifurcation Lesions

  • Choi, Ki Hong; 
  • Bruno, Francesco; 
  • Cho, Yun-Kyeong; 
  • De Luca, Leonardo; 
  • Song, Young Bin; 
  • ... Han, Seung Hwan; 
  • 외 24명
Citations

WEB OF SCIENCE

20
Citations

SCOPUS

24

초록

BACKGROUND Although Medina 0.0.1 bifurcation lesions are often treated by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in real-world practice, the optimal revascularization strategy for this lesion is uncertain.OBJECTIVES The current study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes between 1-and 2-stent strategies in patients treated with PCI for Medina 0.0.1 bifurcation lesions.METHODS The extended BIFURCAT (Combined Insights From the Unified RAIN [Very Thin Stents for Patients with Left Main or Bifurcation in Real Life] and COBIS [Coronary Bifurcation Stenting] Bifurcation Registries) registry was obtained by patient-level merging the dedicated bifurcation COBIS II, III, and RAIN registries. Among 8,434 patients with bifurcation lesions undergoing PCI, 345 (4.1%) with Medina 0.0.1 lesions were selected for the current analysis. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac event (MACE, a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization, and stent thrombosis) at 800 days.RESULTS In the total population, 209 patients (60.6%) received PCI with a 1-stent strategy and the remaining 136 patients (39.4%) with a 2-stent strategy. There was a tendency for higher use of a 1-stent strategy over time (36.0%, 47.4%, and 90.4% in 2003-2009, 2010-2014, and 2015-2017, respectively; P for trend < 0.001). For the treatment of Medina 0.0.1 lesions, there was no significant difference in the risk of MACE between 1-and 2-stent strategies (1 stent vs 2 stent, 14.3% vs 13.9%; HR: 1.034; 95% CI: 0.541-1.977; P 1/4 0.92). The risk of MACE was also not significantly different when stratifying into 3 groups (1-stent crossover only, 1-stent with strut opening, and 2-stent strategy). CONCLUSIONS In patients with a Medina 0.0.1 type bifurcation lesion, PCI with a 1-stent strategy showed comparable outcomes to that of a 2-stent strategy. (Coronary Bifurcation Stenting II [COBIS II]; NCT01642992; Coronary Bifurcation Stenting III [COBIS III]; NCT03068494; Very Thin Stents for Patients with Left Main or Bifurcation in Real Life [RAIN]; NCT03544294) (c) 2023 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.

키워드

0.0.1; bifurcation; Medina classification; outcomes; percutaneous coronary intervention; stent technique; DOUBLE KISSING CRUSH; LEFT MAIN; RANDOMIZED-TRIAL; INTERVENTION; STRATEGY; IMPACT; IMPLANTATION; GUIDELINES; STENT
제목
Comparison of Outcomes Between 1-and 2-Stent Techniques for Medina Classification 0.0.1 Coronary Bifurcation Lesions
저자
Choi, Ki Hong; Bruno, Francesco; Cho, Yun-Kyeong; De Luca, Leonardo; Song, Young Bin; Kang, Jeehoon; Mattesini, Alessio; Gwon, Hyeon-Cheol; Truffa, Alessandra; Kim, Hyo-Soo; Wanha, Wojciech; Chun, Woo Jung; Gili, Sebastiano; Hur, Seung-Ho; Helft, Gerard; Han, Seung Hwan; Cortese, Bernardo; Lee, Cheol Hyun; Escaned, Javier; Yoon, Hyuck-Jun; Chieffo, Alaide; Hahn, Joo-Yong; Gallone, Guglielmo; Choi, Seung-Hyuk; De Ferrari, Gaetano; Koo, Bon-Kwon; Quadri, Giorgio; D'Ascenzo, Fabrizio; Nam, Chang-Wook; de Filippo, Ovidio
DOI
10.1016/j.jcin.2023.06.013
발행일
2023-09
유형
Article
저널명
JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions
권
16
호
17
페이지
2083 ~ 2093