Novel Insights of Jailed Balloon and Jailed Corsair Technique for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention of Bifurcation Lesions

The 17th expert consensus document of the European Bifurcation Club - techniques to preserve access to the side branch during stepwise provisional stenting

Provisional stenting has become the default technique for the treatment of most coronary bifurcation lesions. However, the side branch (SB) can become compromised after main vessel (MV) stenting and restoring SB patency can be difficult in challenging anatomies. Angiographic and intracoronary imaging criteria can predict the risk of side branch closure and may encourage use of side branch protection strategies. These protective approaches provide strategies to avoid SB closure or overcome compromise following MV stenting, minimising periprocedural injury. In this article, we analyse the strategies of SB preservation discussed and developed during the most recent European Bifurcation Club (EBC) meetings.

Provisional or 2-Stent Technique for Bifurcation Lesions in the Second-Generation Drug-Eluting Stent Era

Background

For bifurcating coronary lesions, a provisional stent technique is recommended compared with a routine 2-stent strategy. However, much of these data are from trials involving first-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) or bare-metal stents where the risk of restenosis with the 2-stent technique is higher. We investigated the efficacy of various 2-stent techniques versus a provisional stent technique for bifurcation lesions with newer-generation DES.

Methods

PubMed and Embase were searched through May 2022 for randomized control trials investigating bifurcation percutaneous coronary intervention techniques using newer-generation DES, and a meta-analysis was conducted. The primary end point was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) at the longest reported follow-up time.

Results

Our study identified 13 randomized control trials including 4041 patients. Compared with the provisional technique, 2-stent techniques significantly decreased MACE (hazard ratio [HR], 0.76; 95% CI, 0.59-0.97; P = .03), target vessel myocardial infarction (HR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.20-0.71; P = .002), and target vessel revascularization (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.47-0.93; P = .02). There were no significant differences in all-cause mortality (HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.62-1.45; P = .79), cardiovascular mortality (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.49-1.38; P = .45), myocardial infarction (HR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.73-1.37; P = .99), and stent thrombosis (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.52-1.44; P = .58). Of the 2-stent techniques, the double kissing crush technique significantly decreased MACE and target lesion revascularization than other 2-stent techniques.

Conclusions

In this era of newer-generation DES, a 2-stent approach, especially the double kissing crush technique, is superior to a provisional stenting technique for a bifurcation lesion, with a significant reduction in MACE, target vessel myocardial infarction, and revascularization.

Percutaneous coronary intervention of bifurcation lesions

Bifurcation coronary artery disease is common as the development of atherosclerosis is facilitated by altered endothelial shear stress. Multiple anatomical and physiological factors need to be considered when treating bifurcation lesions. To achieve optimal results, various stenting techniques have been developed, each with benefits and limitations. In this state-of-the-art review we describe technically important characteristics of bifurcation lesions and summarise the evidence supporting contemporary bifurcation techniques.

Effect of Wire Jailing at Side Branch in 1-Stent Strategy for Coronary Bifurcation Lesions

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to determine whether side branch (SB) wire jailing before main vessel (MV) stenting could prevent SB occlusion after the 1-stent strategy for bifurcation percutaneous coronary intervention.

BACKGROUND

The benefits of SB wire jailing in the 1-stent strategy remain unclear.

METHODS

From the COBIS (Coronary Bifurcation Stenting) III registry, 1,890 patients with bifurcation lesions who underwent the 1-stent strategy using second-generation drug-eluting stents were identified and classified into 2 groups according to the use of SB wire jailing: wire jailing (n = 819) and non-wire jailing (n = 1,071). The incidence of SB occlusion (Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction flow grade <3) and target lesion failure (cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization) was compared.

RESULTS

The incidence of final SB occlusion was not significantly different between wire jailing (1.8%) vs non-wire jailing (2.9%; P = 0.182). However, wire jailing at the SB was a significant protective factor for SB occlusion after MV stenting on multivariate analysis and was significantly associated with a lower incidence of SB occlusion in patients with significant stenoses (≥60%) at the SB (5.1% vs 11.3%; odds ratio: 0.42; 95% CI: 0.19-0.89; P = 0.028) or MV (3.1% vs 6.2%; odds ratio: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.24-0.95; P = 0.039). During follow-up (median 52 months), the incidence of target lesion failure was not significantly different between wire jailing and non-wire jailing (7.6% vs 6.3%; P = 0.343).

CONCLUSIONS

During bifurcation percutaneous coronary intervention with the 1-stent strategy, wire jailing at the SB was associated with a lower rate of final SB occlusion following MV stenting in patients with severe stenoses at the SB or MV but not with overall bifurcation lesions. Long-term clinical outcomes were comparable between the 2 groups.

Active Versus Conventional Side Branch Protection Strategy for Coronary Bifurcation Lesions

The side branch (SB) provisional stenting strategy is currently the recommended approach for most coronary bifurcation lesions. However, this strategy may result in SB deterioration, which is associated with an increased incidence of periprocedural myocardial infarction (PMI) and may adversely affect the long-term prognosis. Various techniques for SB protection (SB-P) have been developed to reduce SB occlusion and improve the clinical prognosis. This meta-analysis was performed to compare the outcomes of an active SB-P strategy of jailed balloon technique, balloon-stent kissing technique, and jailed Corsair technique versus the conventional SB-P strategy based on jailed wire technique.This meta-analysis included 5 studies (4 randomized and 1 observational) involving a total of 1,174 patients in whom the active and conventional SB-P strategies were compared. Fixed- and random-effects models were used to calculate summary risk ratios (RRs).The risk of SB occlusion was significantly lower in active SB-P strategy [RR 0.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.30-0.73 in fixed-effect model; RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.31-0.87 in random-effect model]. The risk of PMI was similar between the two strategies (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.30-1.33 in fixed-effect model; RR 0.71, 95%CI 0.20-2.48 in random-effect model). The rate of long-term major adverse cardiovascular events was similar between the groups (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.15-1.48 in fixed-effect model; RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.16-1.52 in random-effect model).The active SB-P strategy in coronary bifurcation lesions is associated with reduced SB deterioration, but it does not decrease PMI or improve the long-term prognosis.

Multicentre, randomized comparison of two-stent and provisional stenting techniques in patients with complex coronary bifurcation lesions: the DEFINITION II trial

AIM

The present study aimed to assess the benefits of two-stent techniques for patients with DEFINITION criteria-defined complex coronary bifurcation lesions.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In total, 653 patients with complex bifurcation lesions at 49 international centres were randomly assigned to undergo the systematic two-stent technique (two-stent group) or provisional stenting (provisional group). The primary endpoint was the composite of target lesion failure (TLF) at the 1-year follow-up, including cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction (TVMI), and clinically driven target lesion revascularization (TLR). The safety endpoint was definite or probable stent thrombosis. At the 1-year follow-up, TLF occurred in 37 (11.4%) and 20 (6.1%) patients in the provisional and two-stent groups, respectively [77.8%: double-kissing crush; hazard ratio (HR) 0.52, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.30-0.90; P = 0.019], largely driven by increased TVMI (7.1%, HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.20-0.90; P = 0.025) and clinically driven TLR (5.5%, HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.19-1.00; P = 0.049) in the provisional group. At the 1 year after indexed procedures, the incidence of cardiac death was 2.5% in the provisional group, non-significant to 2.1% in the two-stent group (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.31-2.37; P = 0.772).

CONCLUSION

For DEFINITION criteria-defined complex coronary bifurcation lesions, the systematic two-stent approach was associated with a significant improvement in clinical outcomes compared with the provisional stenting approach. Further study is urgently warranted to identify the mechanisms contributing to the increased rate of TVMI after provisional stenting.

STUDY REGISTRATION

http://www.clinicaltrials.com; Identifier: NCT02284750.