Differential Prognostic Impact of Treatment Strategy Among Patients With Left Main Versus Non–Left Main Bifurcation Lesions Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Complex Left Main Trifurcation: A Case Study of Successful Treatment

Objectives: True trifurcation disease of the left main coronary artery is a rare situation encountered in clinical practice. To date, there is no evidence for a standardized strategy of percutaneous coronary intervention in this type of lesion. Methods: This article describes a novel three-stent strategy using a combination of Triple-Kissing Balloon Crush in both of the side branches. This technique is based on a well-established bifurcation stenting technique, namely, the Double-Kissing Crush technique. Results: This strategy was implemented successfully, demonstrating technical feasibility and optimal stent apposition in the trifurcation lesion, ensuring the preservation of all three branches. Conclusions: Although more data and clinical trials are needed to develop proper evidence-based guidelines, three-stent implantation with Double-Trissing Crush should be taken into consideration as a viable strategy for LM trifurcation lesions in the proper set of patients.

Evaluation of Small Vessel Bifurcation Stenting Using the Double-Kissing Culotte and Culotte Technique in Acute Coronary Syndrome: 12-Month Clinical Outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Patients with small vessels who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with subsequent multiple implantation of drug-eluting stents remain at a higher risk of unfavorable outcomes. In complex cases where maintaining flow to all side branches is part of contemporary practice, using two-stent techniques may be appropriate. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of double-kissing (DK) culotte technique in comparison to culotte technique in the context of small-vessel therapy in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS).

METHODS

This substudy of the Lower Silesia culotte Bifurcation Registry retrospectively analyzed patients who underwent ACS-PCI using DK culotte or culotte technique for bifurcation lesions in small vessels, defined as having at least one branch with a diameter of 2.75 mm or less. The primary endpoint was target lesion failure (TLF), a composite of cardiovascular death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically driven target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 1-year follow-up. The secondary endpoint included major adverse cardiac events (MACE).

RESULTS

The DK culotte group (n = 49) and the culotte group (n = 52) were compared, with 12-month follow-up showing lower TLF in the DK culotte group (8.2% vs. 19.2%, p = 0.082). Similar results were observed for TLR (6.1% vs. 13.5%; p = 0.161), stent restenosis (4.1% vs. 9.6%; p = 0.203), and MACE (18.4% vs. 25%; p = 0.344).

CONCLUSION

For bifurcation lesions with a small-diameter artery, the DK culotte technique may reduce TLF and MACE compared to the culotte technique. However, given the limited sample size and the absence of statistical significance, these findings remain preliminary and require further investigation.

One year results of coronary bifurcation revascularization with the re-POT provisional sequential technique. The CABRIOLET registry

BACKGROUND

Re-POT (proximal optimization technique (POT)) is a simple provisional sequential technique for percutaneous coronary bifurcation revascularization with better arterial geometry respect compared to classical techniques. Re-POT has demonstrated excellent mechanical and short-term clinical results. The multicenter CABRIOLET registry (NCT03550196) evaluate the long-term clinical benefit of the re-POT sequence in non-selected patients.

METHODS

All consecutive patients presenting a coronary bifurcation lesion for which provisional stenting was indicated were included in 5 european centers. Re-POT strategy was systematically attempted. The primary endpoint was target lesion failure (TLF), comprising cardiac death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis and target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 12 months' follow-up. The secondary endpoints were the individual components of the primary endpoint, all-cause death, target vessel failure (TVF) and target vessel revascularization (TVR). Complex bifurcation was defined as Medina 0.1.1 or 1.1.1.

RESULTS

A total of 500 patients aged 67.7 ± 11.7 years, 78.4% male, were included from 2015 to 2019, 174 of whom (34.8%) were considered having complex bifurcation lesions. Bifurcations involved the left main in 35.2% of cases. The full re-POT sequence was systematically performed in all cases. At 1 year, TLF was 2.0% (1.7% in complex vs. 2.1% in non-complex bifurcation; p = NS), and TLR was 1.6%, (1.1% vs. 1.8% respectively; p = NS). TVF and TVR rates were 3.2% and 2.8%. On multivariate analysis, only multivessel disease was predictive of TLF at 1 year (OR = 1.66 (1.09-2.53), p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

In this large prospective all-comer registry, provisional stenting with re-POT technique appeared safe and effective at 1 year, without anatomical bifurcation restriction.

Impact of diabetes on long-term outcomes of bifurcation percutaneous coronary intervention. An analysis from the BIFURCAT registry

BACKGROUND

It is still unclear the impact of diabetes mellitus (DM) in complex coronary lesions treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) which themselves are at increased incidence of adverse events.

METHODS

BIFURCAT registry encompassed patients treated with PCI for coronary bifurcation lesion from the COBIS III and the RAIN registry. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of major cardiovascular adverse event (MACE), a composite and mutual exclusive of all-cause death or myocardial infarction (MI) or target-lesion revascularization (TLR). A total of 5537 patients were included in the analysis and 1834 (33%) suffered from DM.

RESULTS

After a median follow-up of 21 months, diabetic patients had a higher incidence of MACE (17% vs. 9%, p < 0.001), all-cause mortality (9% vs. 4%, p < 0.001), TLR (5% vs. 3%, p = 0.001), MI (4% vs. 2%, p < 0.001), and stent thrombosis (ST) (2% vs. 1%, p = 0.007). After multivariate analysis, diabetes remained significantly associated with MACE (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.37; confidence interval [CI]: 1.13-1.65; p = 0.001), all-cause death (HR: 1.65; 95% CI: 1.24-2.19, p = 0.001), TLR (HR: 1.45; CI: 1.03-2.04; p = 0.031) and ST (HR: 1.73, CI: 1.04-2.88; p = 0.036), but not with MI (HR: 1.34; CI: 0.93-1.92; p = 0.11). Among diabetics, chronic kidney disease (HR: 2.99; CI: 2.21-4.04), baseline left ventricular ejection fraction (HR: 0.98; CI: 0.97-0.99), femoral access (HR: 1.62; CI: 1.23-2.15), left main coronary artery (HR: 1.44; CI: 1.06-1.94), main branch diameter (HR: 0.79; CI: 0.66-0.94) and final kissing balloon (HR: 0.70; CI: 0.52-0.93) were independent predictors of MACE at follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with DM treated with PCI for coronary bifurcations have a worse prognosis due to higher incidence of MACE, all-cause mortality, TLR and ST compared to the non-diabetics.

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

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 = 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).

Post-procedural and long-term functional outcomes of jailed side branches in stented coronary bifurcation lesions assessed with side branch Murray law-based quantitative flow ratio

Introduction

In coronary bifurcation lesions treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using a 1-stent strategy, the occurrence of side branch (SB) compromise may lead to long-term myocardial ischemia in the SB territory. Murray law-based quantitative flow ratio (μQFR) is a novel angiography-based approach estimating fractional flow reserve from a single angiographic view, and thus is more feasible to assess SB compromise in routine practice. However, its association with long-term SB coronary blood flow remains unknown.

Methods

A total of 146 patients with 313 non-left main bifurcation lesions receiving 1-stent strategy with drug-eluting stents was included in this retrospective study. These lesions had post-procedural Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) flow grade 3 in SBs, and documented angiographic images of index procedure and 6- to 24-month angiographic follow-up. Post-procedural SB μQFR was calculated. Long-term SB coronary blood flow was quantified with the TIMI grading system using angiograms acquired at angiographic follow-up.

Results

At follow-up, 8 (2.6%), 16 (5.1%), 61 (19.5%), and 228 (72.8%) SBs had a TIMI flow grade of 0, 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The incidences of long-term SB TIMI flow grade ≤1 and ≤2 both tended to decrease across the tertiles of post-procedural SB μQFR. The receiver operating characteristic curve analyses indicated the post-procedural SB μQFR ≤0.77 was the optimal cut-off value to identify long-term SB TIMI flow grade ≤1 (specificity, 37.50%; sensitivity, 87.20%; area under the curve, 0.6673; P = 0.0064), and it was independently associated with 2.57-fold increased risk (adjusted OR, 2.57; 95% CI, 1.02-7.25; P = 0.045) in long-term SB TIMI flow grade ≤1 after adjustment.

Discussion

Post-procedural SB μQFR was independently associated with increased risk in impaired SB TIMI flow at long-term follow-up. Further investigations should focus on whether PCI optimization based on μQFR may contribute to improve SB flow in the long term.

Comparison of Orbital Atherectomy and Rotational Atherectomy in Calcified Left Main Disease: Short-Term Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Coronary calcifications, particularly in left main disease (LMD), are independently associated with adverse outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Adequate lesion preparation is pivotal to achieve favorable short- and long-term outcomes. Rotational atherectomy devices have been used in contemporary practice to obtain adequate preparation of the calcified lesions. Recently, novel orbital atherectomy (OA) devices have been introduced to clinical practice to facilitate the preparation of the lesion. The objective of this study is to compare the short-term safety and efficacy of orbital and rotational atherectomy for LMD.

METHODS

we retrospectively evaluated a total of 55 consecutive patients who underwent the LM PCI supported by either OA or RA.

RESULTS

The OA group consisted of 25 patients with a median SYNTAX Score of 28 (26-36). The Rota group consisted of 30 patients with a median SYNTAX Score of 28 (26-33.1) There were no statistical differences in MACCE between the RA and OA subpopulations when recorded in-hospital (6.7% vs. 10.3% p = 0.619) as well as in a 1-month follow-up after the procedure (12% vs. 16.6% p = 0.261).

CONCLUSION

OA and RA seem to be similarly safe and effective strategies for preparating the lesion in the high-risk population with calcified LMD.

Twelve-month clinical outcomes of "nano-crush technique" for the treatment of bifurcation lesions using ultra-thin (60 µm) sirolimus-eluting coronary stents

BACKGROUND

Provisional stenting is preferred for bifurcation lesion; however, certain anatomical substrate does require two stents as a part of dedicated stent technique. Here, the present study evaluated outcomes of ultra-thin (60 µm) Supra family sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) (Sahajanand Medical Technologies Limited, Surat, India) for dedicated bifurcation lesions using nano-crush technique at 12 months angiographic follow-up.

METHODS

This was prospective, single-center observational study which enrolled patients with de novo bifurcation lesion and underwent angioplasty with Supra family SES using nano-crush technique at a tertiary care center in India, between March-2017 and February-2019. Primary endpoint at 12 months was target lesion failure (TLF), a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction (TV-MI), and clinically driven target lesion revascularization (CD-TLR). Secondary endpoints included patient-oriented composite endpoint (POCE), all-cause death, any revascularization, clinically driven target vessel revascularization, stent thrombosis, periprocedural and spontaneous MI, and device failure.

RESULTS

The study enrolled total 63 patients with a mean age of 62.5±4.9 years and had male dominance (89%). Left main (LM) bifurcation and non-LM bifurcation were observed in 21 (33%) and 42 (67%) patients, respectively. Total 50 (80%) patients had Medina class- 1,1,1. At 12 months, TLF occurred in 4 (6%) patients which included one cardiac death (1.5%), two (3.0%) TV-MI, and one CD-TLR (1.5%). POCE was observed in 6 (9.6%) patients. Stent failure was seen in 2 (3.1%) patient and one patient (1.5%) developed late stent thrombosis. Twelve months angiographic follow-up indicated intact stent patency in all other patients. On multivariate analysis, LM bifurcation, renal dysfunction, LM bifurcation with renal dysfunction, ejection fraction (<35%) and calcified lesion were found as predictors of TLF.

CONCLUSIONS

Dedicated stenting with ultra-thin Supra family SES for complex bifurcation lesion using nano-crush technique reported acceptable clinical outcomes among real-world patients and can be performed safely with ease without any procedural complications.

Effect of Stenting Strategy on the Outcome in Patients with Non-Left Main Bifurcation Lesions

Previous studies have not compared outcomes between different percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) strategies and lesion locations in non-left main (LM) bifurcation lesions. We enrolled 2044 patients from a multicenter registry with an LAD bifurcation lesion (n = 1551) or non-LAD bifurcation lesion (n = 493). The primary outcome was target lesion failure (TLF), a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization (TLR). During a median follow-up period of 38 months, non-LAD bifurcation lesions treated with the two-stent strategy, compared with the one-stent strategy, were associated with more frequent TLF (20.7% vs. 6.3%, p < 0.01), TLR (16.7% vs. 4.7%, p < 0.01), and target vessel revascularization (TVR; 18.2% vs. 6.3%, p < 0.01). There was no significant difference in outcome among LAD bifurcation lesions treated with different PCI strategies. The two-stent strategy was associated with a higher risk of TLF (adjusted HR 4.34, CI 1.93−9.76, p < 0.01), TLR (adjusted HR 4.30, CI 1.64−11.27, p < 0.01), and TVR (adjusted HR 5.07, CI 1.69−9.74, p < 0.01) in the non-LAD bifurcation lesions. The planned one-stent strategy is preferable to the two-stent strategy for the treatment of non-LAD bifurcation lesions.

Impact of directional coronary atherectomy followed by drug-coated balloon strategy to avoid the complex stenting for bifurcation lesions

Although the simple single stenting rather than complex double stenting is recommended on percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for bifurcation lesions, double stenting cannot always be avoided. We investigated the impact of directional coronary atherectomy (DCA), followed by drug-coated balloon (DCB) treatment to reduce the number of stents and avoid complex stenting in PCI for bifurcation lesions and short-term patency. DCA treatment without stents was attempted for 27 bifurcation lesions in 25 patients, of those, 26 bifurcation lesions in 24 patients were successfully treated and 3-month follow-up angiography and optical coherence tomography (OCT) were performed. Sixteen lesions (59.3%) were related to left main trunk distal bifurcations, and 7 (25.9%) were true bifurcation lesions. Among the true bifurcation lesions, 4 lesions (57.1%) needed 1 stent, and the other 3 lesions (42.9%) needed no stents. Among the non-true bifurcation lesions, 1 lesion (5.0%) needed bailout stent and other lesions (95.0%) needed no stents. According to DCA followed by DCB treatment, the angiographic mean diameter stenosis improved from 65.5 ± 15.0% to 7.8 ± 9.8%, and the mean plaque area in intravascular ultrasound improved from 80.4 ± 10.5% to 39.0 ± 11.5%, respectively. Angiographic and OCT late lumen loss values were 0.2 ± 0.6 mm and 1.4 ± 1.9 mm, respectively. No patient had in-hospital major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and 3-month MACE. In conclusion, compared with standard provisional side branch stenting strategy, DCA followed by DCB treatment might reduce the number of stents, avoid complex stenting for major bifurcation lesions and provide good short-term outcomes.

Differential Factors for Predicting Outcomes in Left Main versus Non-Left Main Coronary Bifurcation Stenting

Background: No large-scale study has compared the clinical and angiographic predictors of cardiovascular events in patients with left main bifurcation (LMB) and non-LMB stenting after second-generation DES implantation. Herein, we investigated differential clinical and angiographic factors for predicting outcomes in LMB versus non-LMB stenting. Methods: A total of 2648 patients with bifurcation lesions treated with second-generation DESs from the retrospective patient cohort were divided into an LMB group (n = 935) and a non-LMB group (n = 1713). The primary outcome was the 7-year incidence of target lesion failure (TLF), defined as the composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization. Results: The incidence of TLF was 9.8%. Those in the LMB group were associated with a higher risk of TLF (14.2% versus 7.5%, p < 0.001) than those in the non-LMB group. Regarding the LMB group, independent predictors of TLF were chronic kidney disease (CKD), reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), and two-stenting. Regarding the non-LMB group, CKD, reduced LVEF, old age, diabetes, and small diameter of the main vessel stent were independent predictors of TLF. Conclusions: The two-stent strategy could potentially increase TLF for the LMB lesions, and achieving the maximal diameter of the main vessel stent could result in better clinical outcomes for non-LMB lesions.

Differential Long-Term Effects of First- and Second-Generation DES in Patients With Bifurcation Lesions Undergoing PCI

BACKGROUND

There is a paucity of data regarding the long-term clinical outcomes of first- versus second-generation drug-eluting stent (DES), especially when used to treat complex lesions such as bifurcation lesions.

OBJECTIVES

The current study compares the efficacy and safety of first- versus second-generation DES at the 5-year follow-up in patients who underwent bifurcation percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

METHODS

A total of 5,498 patients with a bifurcation lesion who underwent PCI were pooled at a single patient level from COBIS (Coronary Bifurcation Stenting) registries II and III. Five-year target lesion failure (TLF) (the composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction [MI], and target lesion revascularization [TLR]) and cardiac death or MI were compared between the use of first-generation DES (n = 2,436) and second-generation DES (n = 3,062) during PCI. Propensity score matching was performed to reduce selection bias.

RESULTS

After a 1:1 propensity score matching procedure was conducted, the cohort consisted of 1,702 matched pairs. Patients treated with second-generation DES had a significantly lower risk of TLF at 5 years than those treated with first-generation DES in both overall and propensity-matched populations (matched hazard ratio [HR_matched]: 0.576; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.456 to 0.727; p <0.001). There were no significant differences in risk of a composite of cardiac death or MI between the 2 groups (HR_matched: 0.782; 95% CI: 0.539 to 1.133, P = 0.193). However, among patients who required a 2-stent technique, use of the second-generation DES reduced cardiac death or MI (HR_matched:0.422; 95% CI: 0.209 to 0.851, P = 0.016). On the other hand, among patients who required a one-stent technique, the risk of a composite of cardiac death or MI was similar between the 2 groups (HR_matched: 1.046; 95% CI: 0.664 to 1.650, P = 0.845). There was a significant interaction between stent generation and treatment strategy for cardiac death or MI (interaction P = 0.029).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients treated with PCI for a bifurcation lesion, the use of second-generation DES was associated with a significantly reduced risk of 5-year TLF than the use of first-generation DES. (Korean Coronary Bifurcation Stenting Registry II [NCT01642992]; COBIS II) (Korean Coronary Bifurcation Stenting Registry III [NCT03068494] COBIS III).

Comparison of simple versus complex stenting in patients with true distal left main bifurcation lesions

INTRODUCTION

Distal left main (LM) bifurcation disease is one of the most challenging lesion subsets for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and optimal stenting strategy for such complex lesions is still debated. This study aimed to compare clinical outcomes following single versus dual stenting for true distal LM bifurcation lesions.

METHODS

Patients with true distal LM bifurcation lesions (type 1,1,1 or 0,1,1: both left anterior descending and circumflex artery >2.5 mm diameter) receiving PCI with drug-eluting stents (DES) from two large clinical registries were evaluated. The primary outcome was target-lesion failure (TLF), defined as a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction (MI), or target-lesion revascularization (TLR). Outcomes were compared with the use of propensity scores and inverse probability-weighting adjustment to reduce treatment selection bias.

RESULTS

Among 1,002 patients undergoing true distal LM PCI, 440 (43.9%) and 562 (56.1%) were treated with single and dual stents, respectively. The TLF rates at 3 year was 20.3% in the single-stent group and 24.1% in the dual-stenting group (log-rank p = 0.18). The adjusted risk for TLF did not differ significantly between two groups (hazard ratio [HR] with dual-stent vs. single-stent: 1.27, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.95-1.71). The adjusted risks for death, MI, repeat revascularization, or stent thrombosis were also similar between the single- and dual-stenting groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients undergoing PCI for true distal LM disease, single- and dual-stent strategies showed a similar adjusted risk of TLF at 3 years. Our findings should be confirmed or refuted through large, randomized clinical trials.

Difference in basic concept of coronary bifurcation intervention between Korea and Japan. Insight from questionnaire in experts of Korean and Japanese bifurcation clubs

The coronary bifurcation intervention varies among countries due to the differences in assessment of lesion severity and treatment devices. We sought to clarify the difference in basic strategy between South Korea and Japan. A total of 19 and 32 experts from Korean (KBC) and Japanese Bifurcation Clubs (JBC), respectively, answered a survey questionnaire concerning their usual procedure of coronary bifurcation intervention. JBC experts performed less two-stent deployment in the left main (LM) bifurcation compared to KBC experts (JBC vs. KBC: median, 1–10% vs. 21–30%, p < 0.0001) instead of higher performance of side branch dilation after cross-over stenting in both LM (60% vs. 21%, p = 0.001) and non-LM bifurcations (30% vs. 5%, p = 0.037). KBC experts more frequently performed proximal optimization technique (POT) in non-LM bifurcation (41–60% vs. 81–99%, p = 0.028) and re-POT in both LM (1–20% vs. 81–99%, p = 0.017) and non-LM bifurcations (1–20% vs. 81–99%, p = 0.0003). JBC experts more frequently performed imaging-guided percutaneous coronary intervention, whereas KBC experts more often used a pressure wire to assess side branch ischemia. JBC experts used a rotablator more aggressively under the guidance of optical coherence tomography. We clarified the difference in the basic strategy of coronary bifurcation intervention between South Korea and Japan for better understanding the trend in each country.

Asia Pacific consensus document on coronary bifurcation interventions

Coronary bifurcation intervention is common but complex. Progress in this field has been made in recent years with considerable contribution from the Asia Pacific (APAC) region. However, the standard of practice varies across the APAC region due to differences in culture, socioeconomic state and healthcare set-up. Practice may also differ from the rest of the world. Hence, a panel of experts was invited to discuss topics relevant to bifurcation intervention in order to make a concerted effort to achieve consensus that is applicable within the region and in line with available evidence.

Optimal strategy for side branch treatment in patients with left main coronary bifurcation lesions

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

There are no guidelines regarding the most appropriate approach for provisional side branch (SB) intervention in left main (LM) bifurcation lesions.

METHODS

The present prospective, randomized, open-label, multicenter trial compared conservative vs aggressive strategies for provisional SB intervention during LM bifurcation treatment. Although the trial was designed to enroll 700 patients, it was prematurely terminated due to slow enrollment. For 160 non-true bifurcation lesions, a 1-stent technique without kissing balloon inflation was applied in the conservative strategy, whereas a 1-stent technique with mandatory kissing balloon inflation was applied in the aggressive strategy. For 46 true bifurcation lesions, a stepwise approach was applied in the conservative strategy (after main vessel stenting, SB ballooning when residual stenosis> 75%; then, SB stenting if residual stenosis> 50% or there was a dissection). An elective 2-stent technique was applied in the aggressive strategy. The primary outcome was a 1-year target lesion failure (TLF) composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization.

RESULTS

Among non-true bifurcation lesions, the conservative strategy group used a smaller amount of contrast dye than the aggressive strategy group. There were no significant differences in 1-year TLF between the 2 strategies among non-true bifurcation lesions (6.5% vs 4.9%; HR, 1.31; 95%CI, 0.35-4.88; P=.687) and true bifurcation lesions (17.6% vs 21.7%; HR, 0.76; 95%CI, 0.20-2.83; P=.683).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with a LM bifurcation lesion, conservative and aggressive strategies for a provisional SB approach have similar 1-year TLF rates.

Validation of bifurcation DEFINITION criteria and comparison of stenting strategies in true left main bifurcation lesions

There are controversies on optimal stenting strategy regarding true left main (LM) bifurcation lesions. The present study compared 1- and 2-stenting strategy for patients with true LM bifurcation lesions as differentiated by DEFINITION criteria. 928 patients with true LM bifurcation lesions (Medina 1,1,1 or 0,1,1) treated with DES were enrolled consecutively. 297 (32.0%) patients were identified as complex LM bifurcation, and 631 (68.0%) patients into simple LM bifurcation group according to DEFINTION criteria. Patients in complex vs. simple LM bifurcation group had significantly higher major adverse cardiac event (MACE, including cardiac death, myocardial infarction [MI] and ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization) rate at 30 days (7.8% vs. 4.0%, p = 0.01), 1 year (10.3% vs. 6.4%, p = 0.04), and numerically at 3 years (14.2% vs. 10.1%, p = 0.07), which was mainly driven by increased MI. Moreover, patients in the 2-stent strategy group had strong trend towards lower incidence of cardiac death in both complex LM bifurcation group (2.0% vs. 5.9%, p = 0.08) and simple LM bifurcation group (1.9% vs. 4.5%, p = 0.07). In conclusion, the complex bifurcation lesion criteria established in DEFINITION study was able to risk-stratify LM bifurcation patients. Two-stent technique yielded numerically lower 3-year cardiac mortality regardless of LM bifurcation complexity.

Prognostic Effects of Treatment Strategies for Left Main Versus Non-Left Main Bifurcation Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Current-Generation Drug-Eluting Stent

Background:

Although 1-stent with provisional approach is the preferred strategy for the treatment of bifurcation lesions, the optimal treatment strategy according to lesion location is still debatable. This study aimed to identify whether clinical outcomes according to treatment strategy differed between left main (LM) and non-LM bifurcation lesions in the second-generation drug-eluting stent era.

Methods:

The Coronary Bifurcation Stenting registry III is a retrospective multicenter registry of 2648 patients with bifurcation lesions who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with second-generation drug-eluting stent. Among the study population, 935 (35.3%) patients had an LM bifurcation lesion. The primary outcome was target lesion failure, a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization.

Results:

Median follow-up duration was 53 months. LM bifurcation was associated with a higher risk of target lesion failure (HR adj , 1.846 [95% CI, 1.317–2.588]; P <0.001) than non-LM bifurcation. Two-stent strategy was more frequently applied in patients with LM bifurcation than in patients with non-LM bifurcation (27.1% versus 11.7%; P <0.001). In the LM bifurcation group, compared with the 1-stent strategy, the 2-stent strategy showed a significantly higher risk of target lesion failure (2-stent versus 1-stent, 17.4% versus 10.6%; HR adj , 1.848 [95% CI, 1.045–3.266]; P =0.035), mainly driven by the higher rate of target lesion revascularization (15.3% versus 5.5%; HR adj , 2.698 [95% CI, 1.276–5.706]; P =0.009). However, the risk of cardiac death or myocardial infarction did not differ between the 2 groups (4.4% versus 6.6%; HR adj , 0.694 [95% CI, 0.306–1.572]; P =0.381). For patients with non-LM-bifurcation, there was no significant difference in the rate of target lesion failure between 1-stent and 2-stent strategies (5.6% versus 6.3%; HR adj , 0.925 [95% CI, 0.428–2.001]; P =0.843).

Conclusions:

Even in the second-generation drug-eluting stent era, the 1-stent strategy, if possible, should initially be considered the preferred approach for the treatment of LM bifurcation lesions.

Registration:

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT03068494.

Outcomes After Left Main Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting According to Lesion Site: Results From the EXCEL Trial

OBJECTIVES

The authors sought to determine the extent to which the site of the left main coronary artery (LM) lesion (distal bifurcation versus ostial/shaft) influences the outcomes of revascularization with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG).

BACKGROUND

Among 1,905 patients with LM disease and site-assessed SYNTAX scores of <32 randomized in the EXCEL (Evaluation of XIENCE Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Effectiveness of Left Main Revascularization) trial, revascularization with PCI and CABG resulted in similar rates of the composite primary endpoint of death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke at 3 years.

METHODS

Outcomes from the randomized EXCEL trial were analyzed according to the presence of angiographic core laboratory-determined diameter stenosis ≥50% involving the distal LM bifurcation (n = 1,559; 84.2%) versus disease isolated to the LM ostium or shaft (n = 293; 15.8%).

RESULTS

At 3 years, there were no significant differences between PCI and CABG for the primary composite endpoint of death, MI, or stroke for treatment of both distal LM bifurcation disease (15.6% vs. 14.9%, odds ratio [OR]: 1.08, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.81 to 1.42; p = 0.61) and isolated LM ostial/shaft disease (12.4% vs. 13.5%, OR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.45 to 1.81; p = 0.77) (p_interaction = 0.65). However, at 3 years, ischemia-driven revascularization occurred more frequently after PCI than CABG in patients with LM distal bifurcation disease (13.0% vs. 7.2%, OR: 2.00, 95% CI: 1.41 to 2.85; p = 0.0001), but were not significantly different in patients with disease only at the LM ostium or shaft (9.7% vs. 8.4%, OR: 1.18, 95% CI: 0.52 to 2.69; p = 0.68) (p_interaction = 0.25).

CONCLUSIONS

In the EXCEL trial, PCI and CABG resulted in comparable rates of death, MI, or stroke at 3 years for treatment of LM disease, including those with distal LM bifurcation disease. Repeat revascularization rates during follow-up after PCI compared with CABG were greater for lesions in the distal LM bifurcation but were similar for disease isolated to the LM ostium or shaft.

Long-Term Clinical Outcomes and Optimal Stent Strategy in Left Main Coronary Bifurcation Stenting

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to investigate the long-term clinical effects of stent generation and stent strategy for left main coronary artery (LMCA) bifurcation lesion treatment.

BACKGROUND

Limited data are available to assess long-term clinical outcomes after stenting, including use of current-generation drug-eluting stent (C-DES) for treatment of LMCA bifurcation lesions.

METHODS

A total of 1,353 patients who were recorded in 2 multicenter real-world registries were treated by either early-generation drug-eluting stent (E-DES) (n = 889) or C-DES (n = 464). Primary endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). MACE was defined as a composite of cardiac death or myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, and target lesion revascularization rates during 3-year follow-up. The authors further performed propensity-score adjustment for clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

During 3-year follow-up, the overall MACE rate was 8.7%. Use of a 1-stent strategy resulted in better clinical outcomes than use of a 2-stent strategy (4.7% vs. 18.6%, hazard ratio [HR]: 3.71; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.55 to 5.39; p < 0.001). Use of C-DES resulted in a lower MACE rate compared with using E-DES (4.6% vs. 10.9%, HR: 0.55; 95% CI: 0.34 to 0.89; p = 0.014), especially for the 2-stent strategy. For patients with C-DES, the presence of chronic kidney disease and pre-intervention side branch diameter stenosis ≥50% were significant independent predictors of MACE.

CONCLUSIONS

Intervention of LMCA bifurcation lesions using DES implantation demonstrated acceptable long-term clinical outcomes, especially in C-DES patients. Use of a 1-stent strategy resulted in better clinical benefits than using a 2-stent strategy.

Outcomes Among Patients Undergoing Distal Left Main Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

BACKGROUND

Distal left main (LM) coronary artery bifurcation disease increases percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) procedural complexity and is associated with worse outcomes than isolated ostial/shaft disease. The optimal treatment strategy for distal LM disease is undetermined. We sought to determine whether outcomes after PCI of LM distal bifurcation lesions are influenced by treatment with a provisional 1-stent versus planned 2-stent technique, and if so, whether such differences are conditioned by the complexity of the LM bifurcation lesion.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The clinical and angiographic characteristics, procedural methods and outcomes, and clinical events through 3-year follow-up were compared in patients undergoing distal LM PCI with a 1-stent provisional versus planned 2-stent technique in the EXCEL trial (Evaluation of XIENCE Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Effectiveness of Left Main Revascularization). Among 529 patients undergoing planned distal LM PCI, 344 (65.0%) and 185 (35.0%) were treated with intended 1-stent provisional and planned 2-stent techniques, respectively. The primary composite end point rate of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke at 3 years was significantly lower in patients treated with the provisional 1-stent versus planned 2-stent method (14.1% versus 20.7%; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.35-0.88; P=0.01), driven by differences in cardiovascular death (3.3% versus 8.3%, P=0.01) and myocardial infarction (7.7% versus 12.8%, P=0.06). The 3-year rate of ischemia-driven revascularization of the LM complex was also lower in the provisional group (7.2% versus 16.3%, P=0.001). In 342 patients with distal LM bifurcation disease that did not involve both major side branch vessels, the 3-year primary end point was lower with a provisional 1-stent versus planned 2-stent technique (13.8% versus 23.3%, P=0.04), whereas no significant difference was present in 182 patients with distal LM bifurcation disease that did involve both side branch vessels (14.3% versus 19.2%, P=0.36).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with distal LM bifurcation disease in the EXCEL trial randomized to PCI, 3-year adverse outcomes were worse with planned 2-stent treatment compared with a provisional 1-stent approach, a difference that was confined to patients without major involvement of both LM side branch vessels.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01205776.

Long-Term Outcomes of Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation After Rotational Atherectomy for Left Main Coronary Artery Bifurcation Lesions

The clinical outcomes of drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation after rotational atherectomy (RA) for complex left main coronary artery (LMCA) bifurcation lesions remain unclear. Among 1,809 patients retrospectively enrolled in the Assessing Optimal percutaneous coronary Intervention for LMCA Registry, we identified 1,199 patients with LMCA bifurcation lesions treated by crossover stenting with DES for the main vessel. The study population was divided according to the use of RA. The patients in the RA group were further subdivided into the 2 subgroups on the basis of the stenting approach. The rates of periprocedural myocardial infarction and in-hospital death in the RA group were comparable to those in the non-RA group. The cumulative 5-year incidences of all-cause death and target lesion revascularization (TLR) were significantly higher in the RA group than those in the non-RA group. However, after adjusting confounders, the excess risks of the RA group relative to the non-RA group for all-cause death and TLR were no longer significant (hazard ratio 0.95, 95% confidence intervals 0.59 to 1.52, p = 0.83, and hazard ratio 1.46, 95% confidence intervals 0.82 to 2.60, p = 0.20, respectively). In the RA group, the cumulative 5-year incidences of all-cause death and TLR were markedly higher in the 2-stent subgroup than in the 1-stent subgroup (58.1% vs 26.0%, p = 0.001, and 43.0% vs 16.3%, p = 0.001, respectively). In conclusion, DES implantation after RA was a safe and feasible strategy in treating those patients with complex LMCA bifurcation lesions. In this strategy, the 2-stent approach was associated with markedly worse 5-year clinical outcomes than the 1-stent approach.

Technical Approaches to Left Main Coronary Intervention: Contemporary Best Practices

Left main percutaneous coronary intervention is an acceptable alternative to coronary artery bypass grafting, and in experienced hands, excellent procedural results can be obtained. A systematic approach to stenting and meticulous attention to detail are required. For most lesions, a single-stent provisional approach is sufficient, but for the more complex lesion, a 2-stent technique is required. Herein, the optimal approach to left main lesion assessment and percutaneous intervention is described.

A novel &ldquo;nano-crush&rdquo; technique for the management of coronary bifurcation lesions: in vitro bench test analysis and preliminary report on real-world clinical evaluation in patients with one-year angiographic follow-up

Aims

Although provisional stenting with a single drug-eluting stent has proven clinical efficacy in the treatment of bifurcation stenosis, some patients may require two stents. We propose a novel technique, called "nano-crush", which is easy to perform and can be used in all bifurcation angles.

Methods and results

The feasibility of the nano-crush technique was confirmed in an in vitro bench test and intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) study. Subsequently, 42 patients with de novo coronary bifurcation stenosis were treated by this novel procedure using drug-eluting stents at our centre between January 2008 and December 2015. We experienced procedural success in all (100%) patients without any complications. The primary efficacy endpoint of the one-year incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) was noted in three (7.14%) patients, comprising one case of cardiac death at nine months post procedure and two cases of repeat revascularisation due to in-stent restenosis. There were no cases of periprocedural myocardial infarction or stent thrombosis. Angiographic follow-up at one year indicated intact stent patency in the remaining patients.

Conclusions

Initial experience with the nano-crush technique demonstrates that it can be performed easily without any procedural complications. Further, the angiographic and clinical follow-up indicates that the nano-crush technique is associated with acceptable clinical outcomes in a real-world scenario.

Treatment strategies for coronary bifurcation lesions made easy in the current era by introduction of the BIFURCAID app

Coronary bifurcation lesions account for 15-20% of all percutaneous coronary interventions. Percutaneous revascularization of these lesions is technically challenging and results in lower success rates than nonbifurcation lesions. There are unique procedural considerations and techniques that are employed in the percutaneous revascularization of these lesions. Our objective is to define the procedural complexities of treating coronary bifurcation lesions and describe the leading provisional and dedicated two stent techniques used to optimize procedural and clinical results, as described in the BIFURCAID app.

Comparison of the planned one- and elective two-stent techniques in patients with coronary bifurcation lesions with or without acute coronary syndrome from the COBIS II Registry

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the impacts of stent techniques on long-term clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using drug-eluting stents (DES) for coronary bifurcation lesions in patients with or without acute coronary syndrome (ACS).

BACKGROUND

Few studies have investigated the impacts of stent techniques for treating coronary bifurcation lesions in patients with and without ACS.

METHODS

This multicenter registry enrolled 2,897 patients undergoing PCI with DES for coronary bifurcation lesions. We investigated the impacts of planned one-stent and elective two-stent techniques in patients with (n = 1,798) and those without (n = 1,099) ACS. Primary endpoint was the incidence of 3-year target-lesion failure (TLF), defined as a composite of cardiac death, spontaneous myocardial infarction, and target-lesion revascularization.

RESULTS

The planned one-stent technique reduced TLF rate compared to elective two-stent technique in the ACS cohort (hazard ratio [HR] 0.49; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.34-0.74; P = 0.001), and not in the non-ACS cohort (HR 0.61; 95% CI 0.35-1.06; P = 0.079). After propensity score matching, the planned one-stent technique had a significantly lower TLF rate (HR 0.47; 95% CI 0.29-0.74; P = 0.001) in patients with ACS, and it also showed a trend toward lower TLF rate with the planned one-stent technique in patients without ACS (9.0 vs. 14.5%, HR 0.59; 95% CI 0.32-1.14; P = 0.116).

CONCLUSIONS

Planned one-stenting reduced TLF in patients with ACS and it also might be beneficial in those without ACS for the treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions.

Current Interventions for the Left Main Bifurcation

Contemporary clinical trials, registries, and meta-analyses, supported by recent results from the EXCEL (Everolimus-Eluting Stents or Bypass Surgery for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease) and NOBLE (Percutaneous Coronary Angioplasty Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Treatment of Unprotected Left Main Stenosis) trials, have established percutaneous coronary intervention of left main coronary stenosis as a safe alternative to coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with low and intermediate SYNTAX (Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery) scores. As left main percutaneous coronary intervention gains acceptance, it is imperative to increase awareness for patient selection, risk scoring, intracoronary imaging, vessel preparation, and choice of stenting techniques that will optimize procedural and patient outcomes.

Bifurcation Culprit Lesions in ST-segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Procedural Success and 5-year Outcome Compared With Nonbifurcation Lesions

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

We assessed short- and long-term outcomes of primary angioplasty in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction by comparing bifurcation culprit lesions (BCL) with non-BCL.

METHODS

Observational study with a propensity score matched control group. Among 2746 consecutive ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients, we found 274 (10%) patients with BCL. The primary outcome was a composite endpoint including all-cause death, myocardial infarction, coronary artery bypass grafting or target vessel revascularization, assessed at 30-days and 5-years.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics showed no differences after propensity matching (1:1). In the BCL group, the most frequent strategy was provisional stenting of the main branch (84%). Compared with the non-BCL group, the procedures were technically more complex in the BCL group in terms of need for balloon dilatation (71% BCL vs 59% non-BCL; P = .003), longer procedural time (70 ± 29minutes BCL vs 62.8 ± 28.9minutes non-BCL; P = .004) and contrast use (256.2 ± 87.9mL BCL vs 221.1 ± 82.3mL non-BCL; P < .001). Main branch angiographic success was similar (93.4% BCL vs 93.8% non-BCL; P = .86). Thirty-day all-cause mortality was similar between groups: 4.7% BCL vs 5.1% non-BCL; P = .84. At the 5-year follow-up, there were no differences in all-cause death (12% BCL vs 13% non-BCL; P = .95) or the combined event (22% BCL vs 21% non-BCL; P = .43).

CONCLUSIONS

Primary angioplasty of a BCL was technically more complex; however, main branch angiographic success was similar, and there were no differences in long-term prognosis compared with non-BCL patients.

Benefit of Final Kissing Balloon Inflation Mandatory After Simple Crossover Stenting for Left Main Bifurcation Narrowing

The role of final kissing balloon (FKB) inflation after simple crossover stenting in unprotected left main (LM) bifurcation stenosis remains unknown. From the Asan Medical Center-Left Main Revascularization (ASAN-MAIN) registry, 413 patients with LM bifurcation stenosis treated by simple crossover stenting with a drug-eluting stent were identified. After simple crossover stenting, FKB inflation was performed in 95 patients (FKB group) and 318 patients finished the procedure without FKB (no-FKB group). The primary end points of the 2-year incidence of major adverse cardiac events (death, myocardial infarction, and left main target lesion revascularization [LM-TLR]) were similar between the FKB and no-FKB groups (12.5% vs 8.5%, p = 0.24). After adjustment, the risk of major adverse cardiac event was not significantly different between the FKB and the no-FKB groups (hazard ratio [HR] 1.10, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.49 to 2.49; p = 0.82). The risk of death (HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.28 to 3.82; p = 0.98), the composite of death or myocardial infarction (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.26 to 3.51; p = 0.96), or LM-TLR (HR 1.32, 95% CI 0.46 to 3.75; p = 0.60) were not significantly different between groups. In conclusions, for the treatment for LM bifurcation stenosis, selective, not mandatory, FKB strategy after simple crossover stenting appears to be associated with a favorable outcome.

Long-Term Outcomes After Stent Implantation for Left Main Coronary Artery (from the Multicenter Assessing Optimal Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Left Main Coronary Artery Stenting Registry)

We assessed long-term outcomes after left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenting based on lesion types and stenting strategies. In the Assessing Optimal percutaneous coronary Intervention for Left Main Coronary Artery stenting registry, we evaluated 1,607 consecutive patients undergoing stent implantation for unprotected LMCA lesions (bifurcation lesions: n = 1318 and nonbifurcation lesions: n = 289). Among the bifurcation lesions, 1,281 lesions were treated with stenting across the bifurcation (bifurcation 1-stent strategy: n = 999 or bifurcation 2-stent strategy: n = 282). Among the nonbifurcation lesions, 219 lesions were treated with nonbifurcation stenting. The median follow-up duration was 4.6 (95% CI 4.5 to 4.8) years. The 5-year risk of bifurcation lesions relative to nonbifurcation lesions was neutral for target lesion revascularization (TLR) (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.82, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.23, p = 0.34) and all-cause death (adjusted HR 1.22, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.71, p = 0.26). The risk of the bifurcation 1-stent strategy relative to nonbifurcation stenting in nonbifurcation lesions was also neutral for TLR (adjusted HR 1.19, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.90, p = 0.47) and all-cause death (adjusted HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.18, p = 0.27). However, the bifurcation 2-stent strategy was associated with worse clinical outcomes than the bifurcation 1-stent strategy in TLR (adjusted HR 1.76, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.52, p = 0.002) and definite or probable stent thrombosis (crude HR 3.50, 95% CI 1.32 to 9.33, p = 0.01), despite neutral risk for all-cause death (adjusted HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.36, p = 0.99). There was no definite or probable very late stent thrombosis up to 5 years. In conclusion, long-term outcomes after stent implantation for unprotected LMCA lesions were not dependent on the bifurcation lesion types but related to the bifurcation stenting strategies with worse outcomes for the bifurcation 2-stent strategy.

Comparison Between 1- and 2-Stent Strategies in Unprotected Distal Left Main Disease

Background—

There are only little data available on the comparison of clinical outcomes between a 1-stent strategy (1-SS) and a 2-stent strategy (2-SS) for percutaneous coronary intervention in unprotected distal left main disease.

Methods and Results—

Between April 2005 and August 2011, we recruited 937 consecutive unprotected distal left main patients treated with drug-eluting stents (1-SS, 608 patients; 2-SS, 329 patients). Major adverse cardiovascular events were defined as all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization (TLR) during the median follow-up period of 1592 days. Furthermore, the individual components of major adverse cardiovascular events, cardiac death, and stent thrombosis were evaluated. More complex lesions were seen with 2-SS than with 1-SS. Cardiac death occurred more frequently with 1-SS than with 2-SS (propensity score–adjusted hazard ratio, 0.52; 95% confidence interval, 0.29–0.64; P =0.03), whereas TLR occurred more frequently with 2-SS than with 1-SS (propensity score–adjusted hazard ratio, 1.59; 95% confidence interval, 1.15–2.20; P =0.005). TLR was mainly driven by revascularizations after restenosis at the ostial left circumflex artery (propensity score–adjusted hazard ratio, 1.94; 95% confidence interval, 1.33–2.82; P =0.001). However, there were no differences in major adverse cardiovascular events, all-cause death, stent thrombosis, and myocardial infarction. Of the 139 pairs that were propensity score matched, only TLRs were significantly higher in the 2-SS group (hazard ratio, 1.59; 95% confidence interval, 1.00–2.53; P =0.05).

Conclusions—

The difference between 1-SS and 2-SS in percutaneous coronary intervention for unprotected distal left main disease may be summarized by the high incidence of TLR, mainly because of restenosis at the ostial left circumflex artery in the 2-SS group.

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Bifurcation Lesions

This article summarizes treatment alternatives for coronary bifurcation lesions. It also reviews current definitions and classifications pertaining to bifurcation lesions and provides an overview of the impact of bifurcation lesions on clinical outcomes.

Practical based approach to left main bifurcation stenting

Despite the recent developments that have been made in the field of percutaneous left main (LM) intervention, the treatment of distal LM bifurcation remains challenging. The provisional one-stent approach for LM bifurcation has shown more favorable outcomes than the two-stent technique, making the former the preferred strategy in most types of LM bifurcation stenosis. However, elective two-stent techniques, none of which has been proven superior to the others, are still used in patients with severely diseased large side branches to avoid acute hemodynamic compromise. Selecting the proper bifurcation treatment strategy using meticulous intravascular ultrasound evaluation for side branch ostium is crucial for reducing the risk of side branch occlusion and for improving patient outcomes. In addition, unnecessary complex intervention can be avoided by measuring fractional flow reserve in angiographically isolated side branches. Most importantly, good long-term clinical outcomes are more related to the successful procedure itself than to the type of stenting technique, emphasizing the greater importance of optimizing the chosen technique than the choice of method.

Stenting of coronary bifurcation lesions: a literature and technical review

Newer generation drug-eluting stents have improved outcomes in various subsets of coronary lesions including bifurcation lesions. This article reviews the current literature on various issues in bifurcation percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Generally, the provisional approach of placing one stent in the main vessel is the preferred first-line treatment for most bifurcation lesions. However, some lesions require 2-stenting. It is unknown whether 2nd-generation DES have improved outcomes with 2-stenting. The use of fractional flow reserve (FFR) for the assessment of functional significance of the jailed side branch can help avoid unnecessary stenting in complex lesions. Skilled techniques in every step of the 2-stenting process and meticulous use of imaging techniques including IVUS or OCT are warranted to obtain optimal angiographic and clinical results. Dedicated bifurcation stents are feasible treatment options and may change future concepts in bifurcation PCI, although larger trials with control groups are required in order to widely apply these techniques into daily routine practice.

Optimal Revascularization Strategy on Medina 0,1,0 Left Main Bifurcation Lesions in Type 2 Diabetes

Aim. Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease. The implications of a diagnosis of DM are as severe as the diagnosis of coronary artery disease. For many patients with complex coronary artery disease, optimal revascularization strategy selection and optimal medical therapy are equally important. In this study, we compared the hemodynamic results of different stenting techniques for Medina 0,1,0 left main bifurcation lesions. Methods. We use idealized left main bifurcation models and computational fluid dynamics analysis to evaluate hemodynamic parameters which are known to affect the risk of restenosis and thrombosis at stented bifurcation. The surface integrals of time-averaged wall shear stress (TAWSS) and oscillatory shear index (OSI) at bifurcation site were quantified. Results. Crossover stenting without final kissing balloon angioplasty provided the most favorable hemodynamic results (integrated values of TAWSS = 2.96 × 10^-4 N, OSI = 4.75 × 10^-6 m²) with bifurcation area subjected to OSI values >0.25, >0.35, and >0.45 calculated as 0.39 mm², 0.06 mm², and 0 mm², respectively. Conclusion. Crossover stenting only offers hemodynamic advantages over other stenting techniques for Medina 0,1,0 left main bifurcation lesions and large bifurcation angle is associated with unfavorable flow profiles.