AIMS: We aimed to compare healing responses with optical coherence tomography, and clinical and angiographic outcome after treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions with a dedicated stent versus a conventional culotte technique. METHODS AND RESULTS:Forty patients with true and complex coronary bifurcation lesions were randomly assigned to treatment with the Axxess™ bifurcation stent in the proximal main vessel (MV) and additional BioMatrix™ stents in the branches (Biosensors Europe SA, Morges, Switzerland), versus a culotte technique using XIENCE™ stents (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA, USA). The primary endpoint of percentage of uncovered struts at nine months was similar with the dedicated strategy vs. culotte in the proximal MV (median 17.8 [IQR 3.3-24.7] vs. 6.8 [2.0-20.5]; p=0.19), bifurcation core (9.5 [5.7-19.5] vs. 4.0 [0.7-17.6]; p=0.17), distal MV (2.6 [2.3-18] vs. 2.2 [0.5-6.0]; p=0.09) and side branch (5.7 [1.5-11.5] vs. 1.9 [0-5.8]; p=0.14). As compared with culotte, a strategy using Axxess resulted in a significantly larger lumen in the proximal MV both acutely (minimum lumen diameter 3.03±0.51 vs. 2.71±0.44 mm, p=0.04) and at follow-up (mean lumen area 10.0±2.1 vs. 7.1±1.8 mm2, p<0.001), and in a lower angiographic late lumen loss (p=0.05). Both strategies resulted in good clinical outcomes at one year, and no stent thromboses. CONCLUSIONS: As compared with a culotte strategy with XIENCE stents, complex bifurcation stenting using a dedicated strategy combining Axxess and BioMatrix stents results in similar stent strut coverage at nine-month follow-up, and a significantly larger lumen and lower angiographic late lumen loss in the proximal MV.
RCT Entities:
AIMS: We aimed to compare healing responses with optical coherence tomography, and clinical and angiographic outcome after treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions with a dedicated stent versus a conventional culotte technique. METHODS AND RESULTS: Forty patients with true and complex coronary bifurcation lesions were randomly assigned to treatment with the Axxess™ bifurcation stent in the proximal main vessel (MV) and additional BioMatrix™ stents in the branches (Biosensors Europe SA, Morges, Switzerland), versus a culotte technique using XIENCE™ stents (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA, USA). The primary endpoint of percentage of uncovered struts at nine months was similar with the dedicated strategy vs. culotte in the proximal MV (median 17.8 [IQR 3.3-24.7] vs. 6.8 [2.0-20.5]; p=0.19), bifurcation core (9.5 [5.7-19.5] vs. 4.0 [0.7-17.6]; p=0.17), distal MV (2.6 [2.3-18] vs. 2.2 [0.5-6.0]; p=0.09) and side branch (5.7 [1.5-11.5] vs. 1.9 [0-5.8]; p=0.14). As compared with culotte, a strategy using Axxess resulted in a significantly larger lumen in the proximal MV both acutely (minimum lumen diameter 3.03±0.51 vs. 2.71±0.44 mm, p=0.04) and at follow-up (mean lumen area 10.0±2.1 vs. 7.1±1.8 mm2, p<0.001), and in a lower angiographic late lumen loss (p=0.05). Both strategies resulted in good clinical outcomes at one year, and no stent thromboses. CONCLUSIONS: As compared with a culotte strategy with XIENCE stents, complex bifurcation stenting using a dedicated strategy combining Axxess and BioMatrix stents results in similar stent strut coverage at nine-month follow-up, and a significantly larger lumen and lower angiographic late lumen loss in the proximal MV.