Objectives This study sought to evaluate the optimal percutaneous coronary intervention techniques using drug-eluting stents for bifurcation coronary lesions. Background The optimal bifurcation stenting technique needs to be evaluated. Methods The trial included 2 randomization studies separated by the presence of side branch (SB) stenosis for patients having non-left main bifurcation lesions. For 306 patients without SB stenosis, the routine final kissing balloon or leave-alone approaches were compared. Another randomization study compared the crush or single-stent approaches for 419 patients with SB stenosis. Results Between the routine final kissing balloon and leave-alone groups for nondiseased SB lesions, angiographic restenosis occurred in 17.9% versus 9.3% (p = 0.064), comprising 15.1% versus 3.7% for the main branch (p = 0.004) and 2.8% versus 5.6% for the SB (p = 0.50) from 214 patients (69.9%) receiving 8-month angiographic follow-up. Incidence of major adverse cardiac events including death, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization over 1 year was 14.0% versus 11.6% between the routine final kissing balloon and leave-alone groups (p = 0.57). In another randomization study for diseased SB lesions, 28.2% in the single-stent group received SB stents. From 300 patients (71.6%) receiving angiographic follow-up, between the crush and single-stent groups, angiographic restenosis rate was 8.4% versus 11.0% (p = 0.44), comprising 5.2% versus 4.8% for the main branch (p = 0.90) and 3.9% versus 8.3% for the SB (p = 0.12). One-year major adverse cardiac events rate between the crush and single-stent groups was 17.9% versus 18.5% (p = 0.84). Conclusions Angiographic and clinical outcomes were excellent after percutaneous coronary intervention using drug-eluting stents with any stent technique for non-left main bifurcation lesions once the procedure was performed successfully.
|Number of pages||11|
|Journal||JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions|
|Publication status||Published - 2015 Apr 20|
Bibliographical noteFunding Information:
This study was partly supported by a grant from the Korean Society of Interventional Cardiology (2008-1) and Korea Healthcare Technology R&D Project , Ministry of Health and Welfare , Republic of Korea (HI12C0630, HI10C2020, and HI10C2020). The authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose.
© 2015 American College of Cardiology Foundation.
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine