BACKGROUND: Ostial left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD) lesion has been regarded as a lesion subset unsuitable for coronary stenting. Long-term outcomes of sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) implantation for ostial LAD lesions have not been adequately evaluated. METHODS AND RESULTS: Among 12 824 patients enrolled in the j-Cypher Registry, 3-year outcomes were compared between 481 patients with SES-treated ostial LAD lesions and 5369 patients with SES-treated nonostial proximal LAD lesions. Patients with ostial LAD lesions had similar incidences of target lesion revascularization (TLR) as those with nonostial proximal LAD lesions (9.4% versus 9.7%; P=0.98; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.99; 95% CI, 0.7 to 1.36; P=0.94) and death/myocardial infarction (MI) (10.7% versus 11.4%; P=0.82; adjusted HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.76 to 1.4; P=0.77). Among the patients with ostial LAD lesions, those undergoing both main and side branch stenting (n=62) compared to main branch stenting alone (n=419) had a higher risk for TLR (adjusted HR, 4.65; 95% CI, 2.32 to 9.25; P<0.0001) but similar risk for death/MI (adjusted HR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.49 to 2.41; P=0.73). In patients with main branch stenting alone, outcomes after crossover stenting across the circumflex coronary artery (n=225) were not different from those after ostial stenting (n=194) for TLR (adjusted HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.33 to 1.82; P=0.55) and for death/MI (adjusted HR, 1.54; 95% CI, 0.78 to 3.2; P=0.22). CONCLUSIONS: In terms of both safety and efficacy, 3-year outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention using SES for ostial LAD lesions were comparable to those for nonostial proximal LAD lesions. Crossover stenting with a 1-stent approach might be a reasonable option in treating ostial LAD lesions.
BACKGROUND: Ostial left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD) lesion has been regarded as a lesion subset unsuitable for coronary stenting. Long-term outcomes of sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) implantation for ostial LAD lesions have not been adequately evaluated. METHODS AND RESULTS: Among 12 824 patients enrolled in the j-Cypher Registry, 3-year outcomes were compared between 481 patients with SES-treated ostial LAD lesions and 5369 patients with SES-treated nonostial proximal LAD lesions. Patients with ostial LAD lesions had similar incidences of target lesion revascularization (TLR) as those with nonostial proximal LAD lesions (9.4% versus 9.7%; P=0.98; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.99; 95% CI, 0.7 to 1.36; P=0.94) and death/myocardial infarction (MI) (10.7% versus 11.4%; P=0.82; adjusted HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.76 to 1.4; P=0.77). Among the patients with ostial LAD lesions, those undergoing both main and side branch stenting (n=62) compared to main branch stenting alone (n=419) had a higher risk for TLR (adjusted HR, 4.65; 95% CI, 2.32 to 9.25; P<0.0001) but similar risk for death/MI (adjusted HR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.49 to 2.41; P=0.73). In patients with main branch stenting alone, outcomes after crossover stenting across the circumflex coronary artery (n=225) were not different from those after ostial stenting (n=194) for TLR (adjusted HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.33 to 1.82; P=0.55) and for death/MI (adjusted HR, 1.54; 95% CI, 0.78 to 3.2; P=0.22). CONCLUSIONS: In terms of both safety and efficacy, 3-year outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention using SES for ostial LAD lesions were comparable to those for nonostial proximal LAD lesions. Crossover stenting with a 1-stent approach might be a reasonable option in treating ostial LAD lesions.
Authors: Samip Vasaiwala; Helen Vlachos; Faith Selzer; Oscar Marroquin; Suresh Mulukutla; J Dawn Abbott; David O Williams Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2012-07-03 Impact factor: 2.778