| Literature DB >> 26747438 |
K Gert van Houwelingen1, Liefke C van der Heijden1, Ming Kai Lam1, Marlies M Kok1, Marije M Löwik1, J W Louwerenburg1, Gerard C M Linssen2, Maarten J IJzerman3, Carine J M Doggen3, Clemens von Birgelen4,5.
Abstract
The objective of this study is to assess 3-year clinical outcome of patients with true bifurcation lesions (TBLs) versus non-true bifurcation lesions (non-TBLs) following treatment with second-generation drug-eluting stents (DES). TBLs are characterized by the obstruction of both main vessel and side-branch. Limited data are available on long-term clinical outcome following TBL treatment with newer-generation DES. We performed an explorative sub-study of the randomized TWENTE trial among 287 patients who had bifurcated target lesions with side-branches ≥2.0 mm. Patients were categorized into TBL (Medina classes: 1.1.1; 1.0.1; 0.1.1) versus non-TBL to compare long-term clinical outcome. A total of 116 (40.4 %) patients had TBL, while 171 (59.6 %) had non-TBL only. Target-lesion revascularization rates were similar (3.5 vs. 3.5 %; p = 1.0), and definite-or-probable stent thrombosis rates were low (both <1.0 %). The target-vessel myocardial infarction (MI) rate was 11.3 versus 5.3 % (p = 0.06), mostly driven by (periprocedural) MI ≤48 h from PCI. All-cause mortality and cardiac death rates were 8.7 versus 3.5 % (p = 0.06) and 3.5 versus 1.2 % (p = 0.22), respectively. The 3-year major adverse cardiac event rate for patients with TBL versus non-TBL was 20.0 versus 11.7 % (p = 0.05). At 1-, 2-, and 3-year follow-up, 6.5, 13.0, and 11.0 % of patients reported chest pain at less than or equal moderate physical effort, respectively, without any between-group difference. Patients treated with second-generation DES for TBL had somewhat higher adverse event rates than patients with non-TBL, but dissimilarities did not reach statistical significance. Up to 3-year follow-up, the vast majority of patients of both groups remained free from chest pain.Entities:
Keywords: Bifurcation treatment; Newer-generation drug-eluting stents; Percutaneous coronary intervention; Resolute stent; Xience V stent
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26747438 PMCID: PMC5085988 DOI: 10.1007/s00380-015-0786-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Heart Vessels ISSN: 0910-8327 Impact factor: 2.037
Characteristics of patients with true versus non-true bifurcation lesions with side-branches ≥2 mm
| True bifurcation lesion (TBL) group | Non-true bifurcation lesion (non-TBL) group |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 65.4 ± 10.6 | 64.0 ± 10.4 | 0.26 |
| Female gender | 30 (25.9) | 44 (25.7) | 0.98 |
| Diabetes mellitus | 24 (20.7) | 32 (18.7) | 0.68 |
| Arterial hypertension | 64 (55.2) | 90 (52.6) | 0.67 |
| Hypercholesterolemia | 60 (54.1) | 87 (51.5) | 0.67 |
| Current smoker | 33 (28.4) | 42 (24.6) | 0.46 |
| Family history of CAD | 53 (45.7) | 90 (52.6) | 0.25 |
| Previous MI | 41 (35.3) | 48 (28.1) | 0.19 |
| Previous PCI | 22 (19.0) | 29 (17.0) | 0.66 |
| Previous CABG | 12 (10.3) | 11 (6.4) | 0.23 |
| Clinical syndrome | 0.97 | ||
| Stable angina pectoris | 55 (47.4) | 81 (47.4) | |
| Unstable angina | 31 (26.7) | 44 (25.7) | |
| Non-ST elevation MI | 30 (25.9) | 46 (27.9) |
Values are n (%) or mean (±SD). Patients of the TBL group were treated for at least one TBL
CABG coronary artery bypass grafting, CAD coronary artery disease, MI myocardial infarction, PCI percutaneous coronary intervention, TBL true bifurcation lesion
Lesion and procedural characteristics of patients with true versus non-true bifurcation lesions
| True bifurcation lesion (TBL) group | Non-true bifurcation lesion (non-TBL) group |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| De novo lesions | 99 (85.3) | 154 (90.1) | 0.23 |
| Severe calcification | 21 (18.1) | 35 (20.5) | 0.62 |
| At least one aorto-ostial lesion | 8 (6.9) | 15 (8.8) | 0.57 |
| Treated coronary vessels | |||
| Left main | 11 (9.5) | 19 (11.1) | 0.66 |
| Right coronary artery | 17 (14.7) | 36 (21.1) | 0.17 |
| Left anterior descending artery | 91 (78.4) | 124 (72.5) | 0.26 |
| Circumflex artery | 41 (35.3) | 62 (36.3) | 0.87 |
| Medina classification | <0.01 | ||
| 0.1.1 | 39 (33.6) | 0 | |
| 1.0.1 | 18 (15.5) | 0 | |
| 1.1.1 | 59 (50.9) | 0 | |
| 0.0.1 | 0 | 25 (14.6) | |
| 0.1.0 | 0 | 51 (29.8) | |
| 1.0.0 | 0 | 44 (25.7) | |
| 1.1.0 | 0 | 51 (29.8) | |
| Bifurcation angle (°) | 55.7 ± 22.1 | 62.1 ± 41.0 | 0.14 |
| Longest lesion length (mm) | 20.1 ± 11.1 | 20.1 ± 12.3 | 0.78 |
| Degree of stenosis before PCI (%) | 67.5 ± 13.3 | 67.1 ± 13.3 | 0.76 |
| Residual in-stent stenosis post PCI (%) | 15.2 ± 6.2 | 14.3 ± 6.2 | 0.25 |
| Side-branch characteristics | |||
| Lumen diameter SB before PCI (mm) | 2.3 ± 0.3 | 2.4 ± 0.4 | 0.01 |
| Degree of SB stenosis before PCI (%) | 62.8 ± 13.0 | 65.4 ± 18.8 | 0.40 |
| Longest SB lesion length (mm) | 10.0 ± 6.3 | 10.8 ± 8.1 | 0.58 |
|
| |||
| Number of stents per patient | 2.6 ± 1.4 | 2.2 ± 1.2 | 0.01 |
| Total stent length per patient (mm) | 50.0 ± 29.8 | 43.4 ± 27.4 | 0.06 |
| Predilatation | 90 (77.6) | 115 (67.3) | 0.06 |
| Stent postdilatation | 111 (95.2) | 161 (94.2) | 0.57 |
| Final kissing balloon inflation | 65 (56.0) | 67 (39.2) | <0.01 |
| Single- versus two-stent approach | <0.01 | ||
| Single-stent approach | 68 (58.6) | 152 (88.9) | |
| Two-stent approach | 48 (41.4) | 19 (11.1) |
Values are n (%) or mean (±SD) unless otherwise stated. In case of multiple target lesions with side-branches ≥2 mm, quantitative coronary angiographic data of the lesion with the most severe lumen diameter obstruction are presented. In case of multiple bifurcated target lesions, a two-stent approach was scored if applied in at least one target lesion
PCI percutaneous coronary intervention, SB side-branch, TBL true bifurcation lesion
Three-year clinical outcome of patients with true versus non-true bifurcation lesions
| True bifurcation lesion (TBL) group | Non-true bifurcation lesion (non-TBL) group |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| All-cause mortality | 10 (8.7) | 6 (3.5) | 0.06 |
|
| 4 (3.5) | 2 (1.2) | 0.22 |
| Any myocardial infarction | 13 (11.3) | 9 (5.3) | 0.06 |
|
| 13 (11.3) | 9 (5.3) | 0.06 |
|
| 11 (9.6) | 8 (4.7) | 0.10 |
| Myocardial infarction >48 h post PCI | 2 (1.7) | 1 (0.6) | 0.57 |
| Target-lesion revascularization (TLR) | 4 (3.5) | 6 (3.5) | 1.00 |
| Emergent coronary bypass surgery | 0 | 0 | |
| Definite-or-probable stent thrombosis | 1 (0.9) | 0 | 0.40 |
|
| |||
| Target-lesion failure (TLF) | 19 (16.5) | 16 (9.4) | 0.07 |
| Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) | 23 (20.0) | 20 (11.7) | 0.05 |
Values are n (%)
PCI percutaneous coronary intervention
aDue to one withdrawal of consent in the true bifurcation lesion (TBL) group, the number of patients with 3-year follow-up is one lower as compared to baseline. Target-lesion failure (TLF) is a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel-related myocardial infarction, or clinically indicated target-lesion revascularization (TLR); major adverse cardiac event (MACE) is a composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, any myocardial infarction, emergent coronary bypass surgery, or TLR; periprocedural myocardial infarctions occurred during the first 48 h after an index procedure
Fig. 1Cumulative incidence of MACE following PCI with second-generation DES in patients of the true versus non-true bifurcation lesion groups. All patients had been treated for at least one bifurcated target lesion with a side-branch ≥2 mm. DES drug-eluting stents, MACE major adverse cardiac event, a composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, any myocardial infarction, emergent coronary bypass surgery, and target-lesion revascularization, PCI percutaneous coronary intervention
Fig. 2Landmark analysis of MACE at 2 days. MACE major adverse cardiac event, a composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, any myocardial infarction, emergent coronary artery bypass surgery, and target-lesion revascularization
Fig. 3Clinically relevant chest pain at four time points of follow-up. Clinically relevant chest pain was defined as chest pain at moderate physical effort (during moderate/normal daily activities), at mild physical effort, or even at rest