Major Predictors of Long-Term Clinical Outcomes After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Coronary Bifurcation Lesions With 2-Stent Strategy

Comparison between provisional and dual systematic stenting approach for left main bifurcation disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Despite recent advancements, challenges persist in determining the optimal stenting strategy for LM bifurcation disease. Hence, this systematic review aims to compare single provisional and systematic dual stenting for managing LM bifurcation disease. A systematic search was performed until January 14, 2024. For the effect measure, risk ratios (RRs) was calculated. This study included 22 studies with 10776 participants. The all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality revealed comparable outcomes between provisional and dual-systematic stenting (RR 1.13, CI95 %: 0.87-1.47, p 0.36, I2 59 %; RR 1.16, CI95 %: 0.73-1.84, p 0.63, I2 80 %). In addition, MACE, MI, TLR, TVR, and in stent thrombosis also showed similar findings. Subgroup analysis revealed that cohort studies was the source of heterogeneity in all-cause mortality, stent thrombosis, and TLR. This meta-analysis suggests comparable outcomes between provisional and dual-systematic stenting in managing LM bifurcation disease. Further study is needed to validate the outcomes of novel techniques.

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.

Two-Year clinical outcomes after coronary bifurcation stenting in older patients from Korea and Italy

Background

Older patients who treated by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are at a higher risk of adverse cardiac outcomes. We sought to investigate the clinical impact of bifurcation PCI in older patients from Korea and Italy.

Methods

We selected 5,537 patients who underwent bifurcation PCI from the BIFURCAT (comBined Insights from the Unified RAIN and COBIS bifurcAtion regisTries) database. The primary outcome was a composite of target vessel myocardial infarction, clinically driven target lesion revascularization, and stent thrombosis at two years.

Results

In patients aged ≥75 years, the mean age was 80.1 ± 4.0 years, 65.2% were men, and 33.7% had diabetes. Older patients more frequently presented with chronic kidney disease (CKD), severe coronary calcification, and left main coronary artery disease (LMCA). During a median follow-up of 2.1 years, older patients showed similar adverse clinical outcomes compared to younger patients (the primary outcome, 5.7% vs. 4.5%; p = 0.21). Advanced age was not an independent predictor of the primary outcome (p = 0.93) in overall patients. Both CKD and LMCA were independent predictors regardless of age group.

Conclusions

Older patients (≥75 years) showed similar clinical outcomes to those of younger patients after bifurcation PCI. Advanced age alone should not deter physicians from performing complex PCIs for bifurcation disease.

One Versus Two Stents Strategies for Unprotected Left Main Intervention: Gulf Left Main Registry

The optimal stenting strategy for unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) disease remains debated. This retrospective observational study (Gulf Left Main Registry) analyzed the outcomes of 1 vs 2 stents in patients with unprotected left main percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Overall, 1222 patients were evaluated; 173 had 1 stent and 1049 had 2 stents. The 2-stent group was older with more comorbidities, higher mean SYNTAX scores, and more distal bifurcation lesions. In the 1-stent group, in-hospital events were significant for major bleeding, and better mean creatinine clearance. At median follow-up of 20 months, the 1-stent group was more likely to have target lesion revascularization (TLR). Total mortality was numerically lower in the 1-stent group (.00% vs 2.10%); however, this was not statistically significant (P=.068). Our analysis demonstrates the benefits of a 2-stent approach for ULMCA patients with high SYNTAX scores and lesions in both major side branches, while the potential benefit of a 1-stent approach for less complex ULMCA was also observed. Further studies with longer follow-up are needed to definitively demonstrate the optimal approach.

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.

Protective ballooning technique for prevention of side branch occlusion in coronary nonleft main true bifurcation lesions: A single-center study

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of a protective ballooning technique in preventing side branch (SB) occlusion and to assess the long-term clinical outcomes for coronary nonleft main true bifurcation lesions.

BACKGROUND

SB occlusion is a major complication associated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for coronary bifurcation lesions.

METHODS

Patients were consecutively enrolled and randomly assigned to protective ballooning technique or jailed wire technique group. Periprocedural and long-term clinical outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

Patients in the protective ballooning technique (n = 173) and jailed wire technique (n = 167) groups were followed up for 12 months. SB occlusion occurred in one patient (0.6%) and nine patients (5.4%) in each group, respectively. The proportion of thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow grade 3 of the SB was higher in the protective ballooning technique group (98.8% vs. 95.2%, p < 0.05). SB rewiring was necessary in one patient in the protective ballooning technique group (0.6%) with provisional stenting, significantly lower than that in the jailed wire technique group (seven patients, 4.2%; p = 0.03). Periprocedural myocardial infarction occurred in three (1.73%) and six (3.59%) patients in the protective ballooning technique and jailed wire technique groups without significant difference, respectively. Major adverse cardiovascular events at 12 months were similar in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Protective ballooning technique is effective for the prevention of SB occlusion in nonleft main true bifurcation lesions and had favorable long-term outcomes at the 12-month follow-up.

Comparison of 2-Stenting Strategies Depending on Sequence or Technique for Bifurcation Lesions in the Second-Generation Drug-Eluting Stent Era - Analysis From the COBIS (Coronary Bifurcation Stenting) III Registry

BACKGROUND

It has not been determined which specific 2-stenting strategy is the best for bifurcation lesions. Our aim was to investigate the clinical outcomes of various 2-stenting strategies in the era of 2nd-generation drug-eluting stents (2G-DES).Methods and Results:We analyzed 454 patients who finally underwent 2-stenting for a bifurcation lesion, from among 2,648 patients enrolled in the COBIS III registry. The primary outcome was target lesion failure (TLF). Patients were analyzed according to stenting sequence (provisional [main vessel stenting first] vs. systemic [side branch stenting first]) and stenting technique (crush vs. T vs. culotte vs. kissing/V stenting). Overall, 4.4 years' TLF after 2-stenting treatment for bifurcation lesion was excellent: TLF 11.2% and stent thrombosis 1.3%. There was no difference in TLF according to 2-stenting strategy (11.1% vs. 10.5%, P=0.990 for provisional and systemic sequence; 8.6% vs. 14.4% vs. 12.9% vs. 12.2%, P=0.326 for crush, T, culotte, kissing/V technique, respectively). Only left main (LM) disease and a shorter duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) were associated with TLF. The distribution of DAPT duration differed between patients with and without TLF, and the time-point of intersection was 2.5 years. Also, the side branch was the most common site of restenosis.

CONCLUSIONS

The stenting sequence or technique did not affect clinical outcomes, but LM disease and shorter DAPT were associated with TLF, in patients with bifurcation lesions undergoing 2-stenting with 2G-DES.

Risk prediction of in-stent restenosis among patients with coronary drug-eluting stents: current clinical approaches and challenges

Introduction: In-stent restenosis (ISR) has been one of the biggest limitations to the success of percutaneous coronary intervention for the treatment of coronary artery disease (CAD). The introduction of drug-eluting stent (DES) was a revolution in the treatment of CAD because these devices drastically reduced ISR to very low levels (<5%). Subsequently, newer generation DES treatments have overcome the drawbacks of first-generation DES, i.e. delayed endothelialization, and late stent thrombosis. However, the issue of late ISR, including neoatherosclerosis after DES implantation especially in high-risk patients and complex lesions, still exists as a challenge to be overcome.Areas covered: We discuss the mechanisms of ISR development including neoatherosclerosis, past and current clinical status of ISR, and methods to predict and overcome this issue from pathological and clinical points of view.Expert opinion: The initial drawbacks of first-generation DES, such as delayed endothelial healing and subsequent risk of late stent thrombosis, have been improved upon by the current generation DES. To achieve better long-term clinical outcomes, further titration of drug-release and polymer degradation profile, strut thickness as well as material innovation are needed.

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.

Clinical Implications of Bifurcation Angles in Left Main Bifurcation Intervention Using a Two-Stent Technique

Objectives

The aim of this study was to assess the clinical impact of 3 bifurcation angles in left main (LM) bifurcation treated with the 2-stent technique.

Background

Data are limited regarding the impact of bifurcation angles after LM percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

Methods

Using patient-level 4 multicenter registries in Korea, 462 patients undergoing LM bifurcation PCI with the 2-stent technique were identified (181 crush, 167 T-stenting; 63% 1^st generation drug-eluting stent (DES), 37% 2^nd generation DES). Three bifurcation angles, between the LM and left anterior descending (LAD), the LM and left circumflex (LCX), and the LAD and LCX, were measured. The primary outcome was target lesion failure (TLF), a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization (TLR).

Results

In patients treated with the crush technique, the best cutoff value (BCV) to predict TLF was 152° of the LM-LAD angle. In the crush group, a significantly higher TLF rate, mostly driven by TLR, was observed in the LM-LAD angle ≥152° group compared with the <152° group (35.7% vs. 14.6%; adjusted hazard ratio 3.476; 95% confidence interval 1.612–7.492). An LM-LAD angle ≥152° was an independent predictor of TLF. In the T-stenting, no bifurcation angle affected the clinical outcomes.

Conclusions

In LM bifurcation PCI using the 2-stent technique, wide LM-LAD angle (≥152°) was associated with a greater risk of TLF in the crush, whereas none of the bifurcation angles affected T-stenting outcomes.

Histopathologic and physiologic effect of bifurcation stenting: current status and future prospects

Introduction: Coronary bifurcation lesions are involved in up to 20% of all percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). However, bifurcation lesion intervention is associated with a high complication rate, and optimal treatment of coronary bifurcation is an ongoing debate.Areas covered: Both different stenting techniques and a variety of devices have been suggested for bifurcation treatment, including the use of conventional coronary stents, bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS), drug-eluting balloons (DEB), and stents dedicated to bifurcations. This review will summarize different therapeutic approaches with their advantages and shortcomings, with special emphasis on histopathologic and physiologic effects of each treatment strategy.Expert opinion: Histopathology and clinical data have shown that a more simple treatment strategy is beneficial in bifurcation lesions, achieving superior results. Bifurcation interventions through balloon angioplasty or placement of stents can importantly alter the bifurcation's geometry and accordingly modify local flow conditions. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) studies have shown that the outcome of bifurcation interventions is governed by local hemodynamic shear conditions. Minimizing detrimental flow conditions as much as possible should be the ultimate strategy to achieve long-term success of bifurcation interventions.

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.

Prediction of side branch occlusions in percutaneous coronary interventions by coronary computed tomography: the CT bifurcation score as a novel tool for predicting intraprocedural side branch occlusion

AIMS

Side branch (SB) occlusion is one of the major technical hurdles in the percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of bifurcation lesions. Our aim was to investigate whether preprocedural coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) could predict intraprocedural SB occlusion.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 260 bifurcation lesions were enrolled from 246 patients who underwent CCTA before elective bifurcation PCI. Quantitative plaque analysis was performed in the main vessel (MV) and SB. Intraprocedural SB occlusion occurred in 42 lesions (16%). These lesions were characterised by SB plaque, calcified plaque in the MV, low attenuation plaque in the main proximal segment or SB, and a ratio of MV to SB ostium area >4.3, which constituted a point-based CT bifurcation score. The CT bifurcation score was cross-validated, outperforming any angiographic Medina classification or RESOLVE score (c-statistics=0.749 versus 0.631 to 0.551; p<0.05 for all). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy of the CT bifurcation score ≥1 were 90%, 42%, 23%, 96%, and 50%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Comprehensive CCTA assessment was able to predict intraprocedural SB occlusion better than the current angiographic classification or scoring system. The CT bifurcation score may thus be a helpful guide for selecting the optimal bifurcation PCI strategy.

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.

Pathological mechanisms of left main stent failure

BACKGROUND

Despite the increasing use of left main (LM) percutaneous coronary intervention (LM-PCI), there have been no pathological studies devoted to understanding the causes of LM stent failure. We aimed to systematically determine the pathological mechanisms of LM stent failure.

METHODS AND RESULTS

From the CVPath Stent registry, a total of 46 lesions were identified to have LM-PCI. Pathologic stent failure (PSF) was defined as stent thrombosis, restenosis and in-stent chronic total occlusion (CTO). Failed and patent LM stented lesions were pathologically assessed to determine predictors of PSF. Malapposition and uncovered struts were numerically greater in the LM ostium, body, and bifurcation while neointimal thickness was relatively greater in bifurcation and proximal circumflex. In this study cohort, half of the lesions (n = 23) showed PSF. Stent thrombosis (ST, n = 18) was the major mode of PSF followed by in-stent CTO (n = 4) and restenosis (n = 1). Failed lesions showed significantly greater prevalence of malapposition >20% of struts/section (65% vs. 13%, P < 0.01), stent struts crossing an ostial side branch >30% of the circumference (48% vs. 13%, P < 0.01) and uncovered struts >30% (57% vs. 18%, P = 0.03). In multivariate analysis, the prevalence of malapposition >20% was the strongest risk factor for PSF (Odds ratio 8.0, 95% confidence interval 1.8-45.4, P < 0.01) followed by struts crossing an ostial side branch >30% (Odds ratio 4.2, 95% confidence interval 0.8-24.7, P = 0.09).

CONCLUSION

Our data demonstrate the main pathological predictors for LM stent failure are malapposition and struts crossing an ostial side branch and suggest that imaging-guided PCI may be important.

Mid-term outcomes after percutaneous interventions in coronary bifurcations

BACKGROUND

The optimal treatment of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) for lesions located at coronary bifurcations is still debated.

METHODS

Data on 5036 consecutive patients who underwent PCI on coronary bifurcation at 17 major coronary intervention centers between January 2012 and December 2014 were collected.

RESULTS

Follow-up at a median 18 months (IQR 11-28) was available for 4506 patients (89%). Major Adverse Cardiac Events (MACE) occurred in 395 patients (8.8%): cardiac death in 152 (3.4%), myocardial infarction, excluding periprocedural, in 156 (3.5%) and stent thrombosis in 110 cases (2.4%). At multivariable Cox regression, left ventricular ejection fraction ≤30% (P < 0.001), bail-out stenting (beyond a planned strategy of either single or double stenting) (P < 0.001), admission for an acute coronary syndrome (P < 0.001), age >66 years (P < 0.001), multivessel disease (P < 0.001) and diabetes (P < 0.001) were independently associated with MACE. Sensitivity analysis identified premature discontinuation of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) (P < 0.001) and side branch (SB) lesion length ≥9 mm (P < 0.05) as additional independent predictors of MACE.

CONCLUSIONS

Beyond traditional risk factors, multivessel disease, the length of the SB lesion, "bail-out" stenting and premature DAPT discontinuation are independent predictors of mid-term MACE after PCI of coronary bifurcations. This highlights the importance of a carefully planned PCI strategy and adequate therapy adherence to improve the clinical outcomes in these patients.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01967615.

Left Main Disease: What Is the Correct Approach to Revascularization?

Percutaneous coronary intervention of the left main coronary artery has evolved through registries and meta analyses, supported by results from the EXCEL [Everolimus-Eluting Stents (EES) 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 as an acceptable alternative to coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with low and intermediate Syntax scores. Advances in stenting strategies and the availability of larger diameter drug-eluting stents improve patient safety and optimize procedural and patient outcomes.

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.

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.