One- and 3-year outcomes of percutaneous bifurcation left main revascularization with modern drug-eluting stents: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Residence time in complex left main bifurcation disease after stenting

BACKGROUND

Data regarding the mean resident time (RT) after left main (LM) bifurcation stenting are scant. In the present study we performed a patient-specific computational fluid dynamic (CFD) analysis to investigate the different post-stenting mean RT values in LM patients treated with single-or double stenting techniques.

METHODS

Patients were identified after reviewing the local Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) scans database. Overall, 27 patients (mean age 65.5 ± 12.4, 21 males) [10 patients treated with provisional cross-over stenting, 7 with the double kissing crush (DK crush) and 10 with the nano-inverted T (NIT) technique, respectively] with isolated and significant LM bifurcation disease were analyzed.

RESULTS

After LM bifurcation stenting, the NIT showed a higher averages WSS values at all bifurcation sites compared to DK crush and provisional cross-over stenting. Moreover, the mean RT resulted lower after NIT compared to provisional or DK crush. During the diastolic phase, the average RT of the entire LM bifurcation was 0.46 s, 0.38 s and 0.33 s after using the provisional stenting, DK crush and NIT, respectively. Moreover, the average RT in the LM bifurcation decreased by 17.1 % using the DK crush and by 28.2 % using the NIT compared to the Provisional.

CONCLUSION

The present OCT-derived CFD analysis revealed that, in patients with complex bifurcation LM disease, the provisional approach resulted in lower WSS values, while double stenting techniques, especially the NIT technique, resulted in a marked reduction of average RT compared to the provisional approach.

CONDENSED ABSTRACT

In the present study we performed a patient-specific Optical coherence tomography (OCT)-based computational fluid dynamic (CFD) analysis to investigate the different post-stenting mean RT values in 27 patients treated with provisional cross-over stenting, DK crush and Nano-inverted-T (NIT) stenting. The NIT showed a higher averages WSS values at all bifurcation sites compared to DK crush and Provisional. The mean RT resulted lower in NIT compared to Provisional or DK crush. During the entire diastolic phase, the average RT of the entire LM bifurcation was 0.46 s, 0.38 s and 0.33 s after using the provisional stenting, DK crush and NIT, respectively. Moreover, the average RT in the entire LM bifurcation decreased by 17.1 % using the DK crush and by 28.2 % using the NIT compared to the Provisional.

Prognostic Impact of a Routine Six-Month Exercise Stress Test after Complex Left Main Bifurcation Percutaneous Intervention

The prognostic value of exercise stress test after complex left main (LM) coronary artery bifurcation (LM) stenting has been poorly investigated. To partially fill this gap in knowledge, we retrospectively analyzed the procedural and medical data of consecutive patients referred to our center for complex LM bifurcation disease between January 2008 and May 2018 who were treated using either single- or dual-stenting techniques. The prognostic impact of an exercise stress test, performed 6 months after the coronary intervention, was evaluated in 502 patients (316 males, mean age 70.3 ± 12.8 years, mean Syntax score 31.6 ± 6.3). At follow up after a mean of 37.1 ± 10.8 months (range 22.1-47.3 months), the target lesion failure (TLF) rate was 10.1% while stent thrombosis and cardiovascular mortality were 1.2 and 3.6%, respectively. A positive exercise stress test was detected at 6-month follow up in 42 out of 502 patients (8.4%); the incidence of a significant restenosis was 7.6% (n = 38). Patients with a negative exercise stress test at 6-month follow up had higher freedom from TLF and improved survival compared to those with a positive exercise stress test.

Comparing the clinical outcomes of single vs. systematic dual stenting strategies for unprotected left main bifurcation lesion: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The optimal percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) strategy for coronary left main (LM) bifurcation lesions remains controversial. This meta-analysis compared the medium and long-term follow-up clinical outcomes of single vs. systematic dual stenting strategies of LM bifurcation lesions.

METHODS

We systematically identified studies published within 5 years comparing single vs. systematic double stenting strategies for LM bifurcation lesions. The primary endpoint was medium-term (1 year) and long-term (at least 3 years) all-cause death. Secondary outcomes included major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), target lesion revascularization (TLR), overall occurrence of stent thrombosis (ST), cardiovascular (CV) mortality, and myocardial infarction (MI).

RESULTS

Two randomized controlled trials and nine observational studies with 7,318 patients were included in this meta-analysis. In terms of the medium-term follow-up clinical outcomes, our pooled analysis showed that use of the systematic dual stenting strategy was associated with a lower ST risk (odds ratio [OR] = 0.43, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.20-0.89, P = 0.02) and cardiac death risk (OR = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.21-0.89, P = 0.02) compared to the single stenting strategy; there was no significant difference between the two strategies regarding rates of all-cause death, MACE, TLR, and MI. Patients with long-term follow-up showed comparable observed clinical outcomes between the two strategies. Most importantly, for patients with true LM bifurcation, the risk of all-cause death, ST, and CV mortality following the systematic dual stenting strategy was significantly lower than the single stenting strategy.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with LM bifurcation lesions, both the systematic dual stenting strategy and single stenting strategy demonstrated comparable results in terms of all-cause mortality during medium-term and long-term follow-up. However, the systematic dual stenting strategy showed a tendency towards lower incidence of ST and CV mortality compared to the single stenting strategy during medium-term follow-up. Consequently, the systematic dual stenting strategy yielded superior clinical outcomes for patients with LM bifurcation lesions.

Meta-Analysis of Provisional Versus Systematic Double-Stenting Strategy for Left Main Bifurcation Lesions

OBJECTIVE

We sought to compare the clinical outcomes with provisional versus double-stenting strategy for left main (LM) bifurcation percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

BACKGROUND

Despite two recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and several observational reports, the optimal LM bifurcation PCI technique remains controversial.

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled-Trials (CENTRAL), Clinicaltrials.gov, International Clinical Trial Registry Platform were leveraged for studies comparing PCI bifurcation techniques for LM coronary lesions using second-generation drug eluting stents (DES). The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Secondary outcomes of interest were all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), target vessel or lesion revascularization, and stent thrombosis.

RESULTS

Two RCTs and 10 observational studies with 7105 patients were included. Median follow-up duration was 42 months (IQR: 25.7). Double stenting was associated with a trend towards higher incidence of MACE (odds ratio [OR] 1.20; 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.94 to 1.53) compared with provisional stenting. This was mainly driven by higher rates of target lesion revascularization (TLR) (OR 1.50; 95 % CI 1.07 to 2.11). There were no statistically significant differences in the incidence of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, MI, or stent thrombosis. On subgroup analysis according to the study type, provisional stenting was associated with lower MACE and TLR in observational studies, but not in RCTs.

CONCLUSION

For LM bifurcation PCI using second-generation DES, a provisional stenting strategy was associated with a trend towards lower incidence of MACE driven by statistically significant lower rates of TLR, compared with systematic double stenting. These differences were primarily driven by observational studies. Further RCTs are warranted to confirm these findings.

Single versus Double Stenting in NSTEMI Patients with Complex Left Main Bifurcation Disease

Background: Among patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) the presence of a bifurcation left main (LM) disease represents a particular subset graved by both clinical and technical challenges. We sought to assess the long-term outcomes of patients with NSTEMI treated either by single or double stent strategy, having an LM bifurcation culprit lesion. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the procedural and medical data of consecutive patients referred to our center for NSTEMI due to complex LM bifurcation disease as the culprit lesion, treated using either single or dual stenting (provisional stenting, T or T-and-Protrusion (TAP), Culotte, and Nano-inverted-T (NIT)) techniques between January 2008 and May 2018. Target lesion failure (TLF) was defined as the composite of cardiovascular death, target-vessel myocardial infarction (MI), and clinically driven target lesion revascularization (TLR). Results: Four hundred and forty-five patients (54.1% males, mean age 70.3 ± 12.8 years, mean Syntax score 31.6 ± 6.3) were evaluated. Of these, 155 patients (34.8%) were treated using a single stent while the remaining were treated with a double stent strategy. After a mean follow-up of 37.1 months (IQR 22.1-39.3), TLF rate was 8.7% (n = 39): 5/155 (3.2%) in the crossover group; 10/53 (18.8%) in T/TAP group, 14/89 (15.7%) in the culotte group, and 10/148 (6.7%) in the NIT group of patients. Cardiovascular mortality rate was 2.9% (n = 13) while stent thrombosis was 0.89% (n = 4). On multivariate analysis dyslipidemia, Syntax score > 25, triple vessel disease, additional LM ostial, or LM body lesions and the use of Rotablator, were independent predictors of TLF. Conclusions: Either a single or double stent strategy resulted in low rates of TLF, cardiovascular death, and stent thrombosis in the long-term period in NSTEMI LM patients with contraindications or refusal of surgery. A single stent strategy appeared to have a slightly better outcome compared to a 2-stent strategy.

Gender-related differences in clinical outcomes after either single or double left main bifurcation stenting

We sought to examine the impact of gender differences in clinical outcomes at 3 years also comparing the role of double versus single stenting approach for the treatment of coronary unprotected LM bifurcation lesions. We retrospectively analyzed both the procedural and medical data of patients referred to our hub center for complex LM bifurcation disease, treated using Crossover provisional stenting, T or T-and-Protrusion (TAP), Culotte, and Nano-inverted-T (NIT) techniques between January 1st, 2008 and May 1st 2018. The main outcome of the study was to evaluate the association between gender and target lesion failure (TLF) based on the different stenting technique used. Five hundred and sixty-seven patients (251 females, mean age 70.0 ± 10 years, mean Syntax score 31.6 ± 6.3) were evaluated. Crossover, T or TAP, culotte and NIT techniques were performed in 171 (30.1%), 61 (10.7%), 98 (17.2%) and 237 (41.8%) patients, respectively with no differences in baseline and peri-procedural items among gender. At a mean follow-up of 37.1 ± 10.8 months (range 22.1-39.3 moths), the overall TLF rate, cardiovascular mortality and stent thrombosis were 12.1%, 3.1% and 1.0%, respectively. Female gender was associated with an increased rate of major bleeding when treated with double stent strategy (p = 0.02). No gender difference in TLF was noted among gender, independently from the stenting approach used. Among patients with ULM bifurcation disease undergoing PCI, TLF rates were not different between genders at 3-year follow-up either using a single or double stent technique.

Improved Outcomes of Combined Main Branch Stenting and Side Branch Drug-Coated Balloon versus Two-Stent Strategy in Patients with Left Main Bifurcation Lesions

BACKGROUND

Drug-eluting stent (DES) plus drug-coated balloon (DCB) is a safe and effective treatment strategy for coronary artery bifurcation lesions, but there is no report about this strategy being used for left main (LM) bifurcation lesions. We aim to explore the efficacy and safety of DES plus DCB in the treatment of LM bifurcation lesions.

METHODS

A total of 100 patients diagnosed with LM bifurcation lesions by coronary angiography were retrospectively enrolled at our center from January 2018 to December 2019. They received either a two-stent strategy or a main branch (MB) stenting plus side branch (SB) DCB strategy and were accordingly divided into the 2-DES group and the DES + DCB group. Patients treated with DES + DCB were compared with a cohort of matched patients treated with a 2-DES strategy. Clinical data was collected and quantitative coronary analysis was performed.

RESULTS

For immediate postoperative angiography, though the two groups had no differences in the minimal luminal diameter (MLD) and luminal stenosis of MB, the DES + DCB group had significantly lower SB ostial MLD and a higher degree of residual lumen stenosis than the 2-DES group (P < 0.05). At the time of follow-up, the SB ostial MLD of the DES + DCB group was higher than that of the 2-DES group, but lumen stenosis, late lumen loss (LLL), and LLL at the distal end of the left MB were all smaller than those of the 2-DES group (Ps < 0.05). Furthermore, the incidence of lumen restenosis and MACE between the two groups had no significance.

CONCLUSION

The combination of DES and DCB is relatively safe and effective for the treatment of LM bifurcation lesions, and this strategy seems to have advantages in reducing LLL at the SB ostium.

Long-term safety of paclitaxel drug-coated balloon-only angioplasty for de novo coronary artery disease: the SPARTAN DCB study

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to investigate long-term survival of paclitaxel DCB for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

BACKGROUND

Safety concerns have been raised over the use of paclitaxel devices for peripheral artery disease recently, following a meta-analysis suggesting increased late mortality. With regard to drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty for coronary artery intervention however, there is limited data to date regarding possible late mortality relating to paclitaxel.

METHODS

We compared all-cause mortality of patients treated with paclitaxel DCB to those with non-paclitaxel second-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) for stable, de novo coronary artery disease from 1st January 2011 till 31st December 2018. To have homogenous groups allowing data on safety to be interpreted accurately, we excluded patients with previous PCI and patients treated with a combination of both DCB and DES in subsequent PCIs. Data were analysed with Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression statistical models.

RESULTS

We present 1517 patients; 429 treated with paclitaxel DCB and 1088 treated with DES. On univariate analysis, age, hypercholesterolaemia, hypertension, peripheral vascular disease, prior myocardial infarction, heart failure, smoking, atrial fibrillation, decreasing estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) [and renal failure (eGFR < 45)] were associated with worse survival. DCB intervention showed a non-significant trend towards better prognosis compared to DES (p = 0.08). On multivariable analysis age, decreasing eGFR and smoking associated with worse prognosis.

CONCLUSION

We found no evidence of late mortality associated with DCB angioplasty compared with non-paclitaxel second-generation DES in up to 5 years follow-up. DCB is a safe option for the treatment of de novo coronary artery disease.

A Case Summary of the Application of a Drug-Eluting Stent Combined with a Drug-Coated Balloon in Left Main Coronary Artery Disease

Objective: To evaluate the clinical efficacy of a drug-eluting stent (DES) combined with a drug-coated balloon (DCB)in the treatment of left main coronary artery bifurcation lesions.Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on the clinical data of eight patients with left main coronary arterybifurcation lesions treated with a DES combined with a DCB who were admitted to our hospital from July 2016 to July2017. These eight patients all underwent DES treatment for their left main coronary artery and left anterior descendingcoronary artery lesions, and DCB treatment at the ostium of the left circumflex artery; six of the patients underwentsurgical procedures under the guidance of intravascular ultrasonography. Immediate postoperative angiography wasused to evaluate the patency of the diseased vessels, and the restenosis rate at the 6-month follow-up after the operationand the incidence of serious clinical events within 6 months were assessed as well.Results: The use of a DES combined with a DCB in the treatment of left main coronary artery bifurcation lesions hada low restenosis rate (left main coronary artery (8.4 ± 5.3)%, left anterior descending coronary artery (18.2 ± 5.0)%,left circumflex artery (30.5 ± 16.5)%). No serious clinical events occurred in any patients.Conclusion: A DES combined with a DCB is a safe and effective interventional treatment for left main artery coronarybifurcation lesions.