BACKGROUND: Percutaneous treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions remains hampered by suboptimal results, mainly in the side branch (SB), even with the use of drug-eluting stents (DES). Paclitaxel drug-eluting balloons (DEB) could provide an attractive alternative to treat bifurcations in combination with a provisional T-stenting technique in order to minimize SB restenosis. We compared angiographic and clinical outcomes of a provisional T-stenting technique with a DEB plus bare-metal stent (BMS) versus BMS versus paclitaxel DES. METHODS: In this randomized, international, multicenter, single-blinded 3-arm study, 117 patients with coronary bifurcation lesions underwent treatment with: (A) DEB in both main branch (MB) and SB and BMS in MB; (B) BMS in MB and regular balloon angioplasty in SB; or (C) paclitaxel DES in MB and regular balloon in SB. All patients underwent provisional T-stenting with an identical stent platform in the MB. Paclitaxel was the drug for elution in groups A and C. The primary endpoint was 6-month angiographic late luminal loss. Secondary end points were 6-month binary restenosis and 12-month major adverse cardiac events (MACE: death, myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization). RESULTS: The procedure was successful in all cases. Late luminal loss, measured respectively in the proximal MB, distal MB and SB was 0.58 ± 0.65, 0.41 ± 0.60, and 0.19 ± 0.66 mm in group A; 0.60 ± 0.65, 0.49 ± 0.85, and 0.21 ± 0.57 mm in group B; and 0.13 ± 0.45, 0.19 ± 0.64, and 0.11 ± 0.43 mm in group C (P = 0.001). Binary restenosis rates per bifurcation and MACE rates were 24.2%, 28.6%, and 15% (P = 0.45) and 20%, 29.7%, and 17.5% (P = 0.40) in groups A, B, and C, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Pretreatment of both MB and SB with DEB failed to show angiographic and clinical superiority over conventional BMS, using a provisional T-stenting technique. Moreover DES showed superior angiographic results than DEB and BMS.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Percutaneous treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions remains hampered by suboptimal results, mainly in the side branch (SB), even with the use of drug-eluting stents (DES). Paclitaxel drug-eluting balloons (DEB) could provide an attractive alternative to treat bifurcations in combination with a provisional T-stenting technique in order to minimize SB restenosis. We compared angiographic and clinical outcomes of a provisional T-stenting technique with a DEB plus bare-metal stent (BMS) versus BMS versus paclitaxel DES. METHODS: In this randomized, international, multicenter, single-blinded 3-arm study, 117 patients with coronary bifurcation lesions underwent treatment with: (A) DEB in both main branch (MB) and SB and BMS in MB; (B) BMS in MB and regular balloon angioplasty in SB; or (C) paclitaxel DES in MB and regular balloon in SB. All patients underwent provisional T-stenting with an identical stent platform in the MB. Paclitaxel was the drug for elution in groups A and C. The primary endpoint was 6-month angiographic late luminal loss. Secondary end points were 6-month binary restenosis and 12-month major adverse cardiac events (MACE: death, myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization). RESULTS: The procedure was successful in all cases. Late luminal loss, measured respectively in the proximal MB, distal MB and SB was 0.58 ± 0.65, 0.41 ± 0.60, and 0.19 ± 0.66 mm in group A; 0.60 ± 0.65, 0.49 ± 0.85, and 0.21 ± 0.57 mm in group B; and 0.13 ± 0.45, 0.19 ± 0.64, and 0.11 ± 0.43 mm in group C (P = 0.001). Binary restenosis rates per bifurcation and MACE rates were 24.2%, 28.6%, and 15% (P = 0.45) and 20%, 29.7%, and 17.5% (P = 0.40) in groups A, B, and C, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Pretreatment of both MB and SB with DEB failed to show angiographic and clinical superiority over conventional BMS, using a provisional T-stenting technique. Moreover DES showed superior angiographic results than DEB and BMS.
Authors: M J Grundeken; M Smits; R E Harskamp; P Damman; P Woudstra; A J Hoorweg; J Baan; E K Arkenbout; J J Piek; M M Vis; J P S Henriques; K T Koch; J G Tijssen; R J de Winter; J J Wykrzykowska Journal: Neth Heart J Date: 2012-11 Impact factor: 2.380
Authors: Franz X Kleber; Harald Rittger; Klaus Bonaventura; Uwe Zeymer; Jochen Wöhrle; Raban Jeger; Benny Levenson; Sven Möbius-Winkler; Leonhard Bruch; Dieter Fischer; Christian Hengstenberg; Tudor Pörner; Detlef Mathey; Bruno Scheller Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2013-08-28 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Franz X Kleber; Harald Rittger; Josef Ludwig; Antonia Schulz; Detlef G Mathey; Michael Boxberger; Ralf Degenhardt; Bruno Scheller; Ruth H Strasser Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2016-01-14 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Georg M Fröhlich; Alexandra J Lansky; Dennis T Ko; Olga Archangelidi; Rodney De Palma; Adam Timmis; Pascal Meier Journal: BMC Med Date: 2013-05-08 Impact factor: 8.775
Authors: Eliano Pio Navarese; David Austin; Paul A Gurbel; Felicita Andreotti; Udaya Tantry; Stefan James; Antonino Buffon; Marek Kozinski; Karolina Obonska; Kevin Bliden; Young-Hoon Jeong; Jacek Kubica; Vijay Kunadian Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2012-12-20 Impact factor: 5.460