3-year follow-up of 100 consecutive coronary bifurcation lesions treated with Taxus stents and the crush technique

Crush techniques for percutaneous coronary intervention of bifurcation lesions

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of coronary artery bifurcation lesions entails technical challenges and carries a higher risk of adverse events on follow-up, driven by repeat revascularisation and stent thrombosis. While most bifurcations can be tackled with a provisional (single-stent) approach, more complex lesions involving both branches (true bifurcation lesions) require a two-stent approach. In the latter context, several techniques have been proposed. Among them, the crush technique has dramatically evolved in recent years, and its more recent iterations have been shown to provide excellent and durable results, both for left main and non-left main bifurcations. The aim of the present work is to discuss the technical aspects and outcomes of the variants of the crush technique from the first description in the early 2000s to the present day.

Randomized Comparison of the Crush Versus the Culotte Stenting for Coronary Artery Bifurcation Lesions

Background:

The crush and the culotte stenting were both reported to be effective for complex bifurcation lesion treatment. However, their comparative performance remains elusive.

Methods:

A total of 300 patients with coronary bifurcation lesions were randomly assigned to crush (n = 150) and culotte (n = 150) treatment. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) at 12 months including cardiac death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, and target vessel revascularization. Index lesion restenosis at 12 months was a secondary endpoint. The surface integrals of time-averaged wall shear stress at bifurcation sites were also be quantified.

Results:

There were no significant differences in MACE rates between the two groups at 12-month follow-up: Crush 6.7%, culotte 5.3% (P = 0.48). The rates of index lesion restenosis were 12.7% versus 6.0% (P = 0.047) in the crush and the culotte groups, respectively. At 12-month follow-up, the surface integrals of time-averaged wall shear stress at bifurcation sites in the crush group were significantly lower than the culotte group ([5.01 ± 0.95] × 10⁻⁴ Newton and [6.08 ± 1.16] × 10⁻⁴ Newton, respectively; P = 0.003).

Conclusions:

Both the crush and the culotte bifurcation stenting techniques showed satisfying clinical and angiographic results at 12-month follow-up. Bifurcation lesions treated with the culotte technique tended to have lower restenosis rates and more favorable flow patterns.

In-stent Anchoring Facilitating Side-branch Balloon Delivery for Final Kissing: A Prospective, Single-center Registry Study

Background:

Recrossing the compromised side branch (SB) with a balloon is sometimes technically challenging. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether in-stent anchoring (ISA) is safe and effective to facilitate SB balloon delivery for final kissing.

Methods:

One hundred and fifty-nine consecutive patients were included (166 bifurcation lesions) in this prospective, single-center registry. ISA was used as a bailout method after unsuccessful SB crossing using conventional techniques, including low-profile balloons. Technique success was defined as SB balloon delivery and final kissing.

Results:

Kissing-balloon delivery was successfully performed with conventional strategies in 149 of 166 lesions (89.8%). In the remaining 17 lesions (10.2%), recrossing of the main vessel stent strut was not successful; therefore, ISA was attempted. The balloon successfully crossed the stent struts, and final kissing was achieved in 15 of 17 lesions (88.2%). Total final kissing was achieved in 164 of 166 lesions (98.8%), with success rates of 100% in the single-stent group and 97.6% in the two-stent group. Two cases without balloon delivery had complex bifurcation lesions with severe calcification. There was no vessel dissection in the anchoring zone.

Conclusions:

ISA is safe and effective for recrossing stent struts when conventional low-profile balloons have failed. However, large-scale trials are warranted for further evaluation.