OBJECTIVES: To compare long term outcomes of the crush versus the T technique in bifurcation lesions. DESIGN: 182 consecutive patients were identified who underwent percutaneous coronary interventions for bifurcation lesions with drug eluting stents between April 2002 and January 2004. Two techniques were used according to the operator's discretion: crush (group C, n = 121) or T (group T, n = 61). RESULTS: In-hospital outcome differed significantly between the two groups. Angiographic follow up was available for 142 (78%) patients. Groups C and T did not differ significantly regarding late loss (0.42 (0.39) mm v 0.34 (0.35) mm, p = 0.52) and rate of restenosis (16.2% v 13.0%, p = 0.80) in both the main and the side branch without final kissing balloon post-dilatation. However, when final kissing balloon post-dilatation was performed, group C had significantly lower late lumen loss (0.23 (0.21) mm v 0.37 (0.33) mm, p = 0.02) and restenosis rate (8.6% v 26.5%, p = 0.04) in the side branch. At one year's clinical follow up, group C compared with group T had lower rates of target lesion revascularisation (14.0% v 31.1%, p = 0.01) and target vessel revascularisation (16.5% v 32.8%, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: In non-selected bifurcation lesions treated with drug eluting stents, the restenosis rate remains relatively high in the side branch. Compared with the T stenting technique, crush stenting with kissing balloon post-dilatation is associated with a reduced rate of restenosis in the side branch.
OBJECTIVES: To compare long term outcomes of the crush versus the T technique in bifurcation lesions. DESIGN: 182 consecutive patients were identified who underwent percutaneous coronary interventions for bifurcation lesions with drug eluting stents between April 2002 and January 2004. Two techniques were used according to the operator's discretion: crush (group C, n = 121) or T (group T, n = 61). RESULTS: In-hospital outcome differed significantly between the two groups. Angiographic follow up was available for 142 (78%) patients. Groups C and T did not differ significantly regarding late loss (0.42 (0.39) mm v 0.34 (0.35) mm, p = 0.52) and rate of restenosis (16.2% v 13.0%, p = 0.80) in both the main and the side branch without final kissing balloon post-dilatation. However, when final kissing balloon post-dilatation was performed, group C had significantly lower late lumen loss (0.23 (0.21) mm v 0.37 (0.33) mm, p = 0.02) and restenosis rate (8.6% v 26.5%, p = 0.04) in the side branch. At one year's clinical follow up, group C compared with group T had lower rates of target lesion revascularisation (14.0% v 31.1%, p = 0.01) and target vessel revascularisation (16.5% v 32.8%, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: In non-selected bifurcation lesions treated with drug eluting stents, the restenosis rate remains relatively high in the side branch. Compared with the T stenting technique, crush stenting with kissing balloon post-dilatation is associated with a reduced rate of restenosis in the side branch.
Authors: T Lefèvre; Y Louvard; M C Morice; P Dumas; C Loubeyre; A Benslimane; R K Premchand; N Guillard; J F Piéchaud Journal: Catheter Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2000-03 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: T Yamashita; T Nishida; M G Adamian; C Briguori; M Vaghetti; N Corvaja; R Albiero; L Finci; C Di Mario; J M Tobis; A Colombo Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2000-04 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Kengo Tanabe; Angela Hoye; Pedro A Lemos; Jiro Aoki; Chourmouzios A Arampatzis; Francesco Saia; Chi-hang Lee; Muzzafer Degertekin; Sjoerd H Hofma; Georgios Sianos; Eugene McFadden; Pieter C Smits; Willem J van der Giessen; Pim de Feyter; Ron T van Domburg; Patrick W Serruys Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2004-07-01 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: R Mehran; G Dangas; A S Abizaid; G S Mintz; A J Lansky; L F Satler; A D Pichard; K M Kent; G W Stone; M B Leon Journal: Circulation Date: 1999-11-02 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: J Al Suwaidi; P B Berger; C S Rihal; K N Garratt; M R Bell; H H Ting; J F Bresnahan; D E Grill; D R Holmes Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2000-03-15 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Allen Jeremias; Brett Sylvia; Jonathan Bridges; Ajay J Kirtane; Brian Bigelow; Duane S Pinto; Kalon K L Ho; David J Cohen; Lawrence A Garcia; Donald E Cutlip; Joseph P Carrozza Journal: Circulation Date: 2004-04-12 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Gregg W Stone; Stephen G Ellis; David A Cox; James Hermiller; Charles O'Shaughnessy; James Tift Mann; Mark Turco; Ronald Caputo; Patrick Bergin; Joel Greenberg; Jeffrey J Popma; Mary E Russell Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2004-01-15 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Antonio Colombo; Jeffrey W Moses; Marie Claude Morice; Josef Ludwig; David R Holmes; Vassilis Spanos; Yves Louvard; Benny Desmedt; Carlo Di Mario; Martin B Leon Journal: Circulation Date: 2004-02-23 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Eram C Chaudhry; Kimberly P Dauerman; Christopher L Sarnoski; Colleen S Thomas; Harold L Dauerman Journal: J Thromb Thrombolysis Date: 2007-01-20 Impact factor: 5.221
Authors: S L Chen; J J Zhang; F Ye; Y D Chen; T Patel; K Kawajiri; M Lee; T W Kwan; G Mintz; H C Tan Journal: Eur J Clin Invest Date: 2008-06 Impact factor: 4.686