BACKGROUND: In a number of coronary bifurcation lesions, both the main vessel and the side branch need stent coverage. Using sirolimus eluting stents, we compared 2 dedicated bifurcation stent techniques, the crush and the culotte techniques in a randomized trial with separate clinical and angiographic end-points. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 424 patients with a bifurcation lesion were randomized to crush (n=209) and culotte (n=215) stenting. The primary end point was major adverse cardiac events; cardiac death, myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization, or stent thrombosis after 6 months. At 6 months there were no significant differences in major adverse cardiac event rates between the groups; crush 4.3%, culotte 3.7% (P=0.87). Procedure and fluoroscopy times and contrast volumes were similar in the 2 groups. The rates of procedure-related increase in biomarkers of myocardial injury were 15.5% in crush versus 8.8% in culotte group (P=0.08). A total of 324 patients had a quantitative coronary assessment at the index procedure and after 8 months. The angiographic end-points of in-segment and in-stent restenosis of main vessel and/or side branch after 8 months were found in 12.1% versus 6.6% (P=0.10) and in 10.5% versus 4.5% (P=0.046) in the crush and culotte groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Both the crush and the culotte bifurcation stenting techniques were associated with similar and excellent clinical and angiographic results. Angiographically, there was a trend toward less in-segment restenosis and significantly reduced in-stent restenosis following culotte stenting.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: In a number of coronary bifurcation lesions, both the main vessel and the side branch need stent coverage. Using sirolimus eluting stents, we compared 2 dedicated bifurcation stent techniques, the crush and the culotte techniques in a randomized trial with separate clinical and angiographic end-points. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 424 patients with a bifurcation lesion were randomized to crush (n=209) and culotte (n=215) stenting. The primary end point was major adverse cardiac events; cardiac death, myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization, or stent thrombosis after 6 months. At 6 months there were no significant differences in major adverse cardiac event rates between the groups; crush 4.3%, culotte 3.7% (P=0.87). Procedure and fluoroscopy times and contrast volumes were similar in the 2 groups. The rates of procedure-related increase in biomarkers of myocardial injury were 15.5% in crush versus 8.8% in culotte group (P=0.08). A total of 324 patients had a quantitative coronary assessment at the index procedure and after 8 months. The angiographic end-points of in-segment and in-stent restenosis of main vessel and/or side branch after 8 months were found in 12.1% versus 6.6% (P=0.10) and in 10.5% versus 4.5% (P=0.046) in the crush and culotte groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Both the crush and the culotte bifurcation stenting techniques were associated with similar and excellent clinical and angiographic results. Angiographically, there was a trend toward less in-segment restenosis and significantly reduced in-stent restenosis following culotte stenting.