BACKGROUND: The purpose of our study was to compare clinical and angiographic outcomes of planned culottes technique with that of provisional crossover single stenting in the treatment of true coronary bifurcation lesions (CBL) with drug-eluting stent (DES). METHODS:True CBL patients (n = 104) were randomly assigned to either the provisional stenting of the side branch (crossover group) or the culottes group. Additional side branch (SB) stenting in the crossover group was required if there was thrombolysis in myocardial infarction flow ≤ 1 flow). The primary end point was the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at nine months, including cardiac death, myocardial infarction, target lesion/vessel revascularization and in-stent thrombosis. The secondary end point was angiographic in-segment restenosis at nine months. RESULTS: The rate of MACE at nine months was similar between the crossover and culottes groups (7.7% vs. 7.7%, p = 1.000). Additional SB stenting in the crossover group was required in 3.8% of patients. There was one procedural occlusion of SB in the crossover group. At nine months, the rate of in-segment restenosis was similar in the parent main vessel (0% vs. 1.9%, p = 1.000), main branch (1.9% vs. 7.7%, p = 0.363) and SB (17.3% vs. 9.6%, p = 0.250) between the crossover and culottes groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that there is no significant difference in cumulative MACE or in-segment restenosis between crossover and culottes groups. Larger randomized clinical trials are warranted to re-evaluate the outcomes of the provisional crossover stenting versus the culottes stenting techniques utilizing DES for true CBL.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: The purpose of our study was to compare clinical and angiographic outcomes of planned culottes technique with that of provisional crossover single stenting in the treatment of true coronary bifurcation lesions (CBL) with drug-eluting stent (DES). METHODS: True CBL patients (n = 104) were randomly assigned to either the provisional stenting of the side branch (crossover group) or the culottes group. Additional side branch (SB) stenting in the crossover group was required if there was thrombolysis in myocardial infarction flow ≤ 1 flow). The primary end point was the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at nine months, including cardiac death, myocardial infarction, target lesion/vessel revascularization and in-stent thrombosis. The secondary end point was angiographic in-segment restenosis at nine months. RESULTS: The rate of MACE at nine months was similar between the crossover and culottes groups (7.7% vs. 7.7%, p = 1.000). Additional SB stenting in the crossover group was required in 3.8% of patients. There was one procedural occlusion of SB in the crossover group. At nine months, the rate of in-segment restenosis was similar in the parent main vessel (0% vs. 1.9%, p = 1.000), main branch (1.9% vs. 7.7%, p = 0.363) and SB (17.3% vs. 9.6%, p = 0.250) between the crossover and culottes groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that there is no significant difference in cumulative MACE or in-segment restenosis between crossover and culottes groups. Larger randomized clinical trials are warranted to re-evaluate the outcomes of the provisional crossover stenting versus the culottes stenting techniques utilizing DES for true CBL.
Authors: Lei Ge; Flavio Airoldi; Ioannis Iakovou; John Cosgrave; Iassen Michev; Giuseppe M Sangiorgi; Matteo Montorfano; Alaide Chieffo; Mauro Carlino; Nicola Corvaja; Antonio Colombo Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2005-08-16 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Angela Hoye; Ioannis Iakovou; Lei Ge; Carlos A G van Mieghem; Andrew T L Ong; John Cosgrave; Giuseppe M Sangiorgi; Flavio Airoldi; Matteo Montorfano; Iassen Michev; Alaide Chieffo; Mauro Carlino; Nicola Corvaja; Jiro Aoki; Gaston A Rodriguez Granillo; Marco Valgimigli; Georgios Sianos; Willem J van der Giessen; Pim J de Feyter; Ron T van Domburg; Patrick W Serruys; Antonio Colombo Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2006-04-24 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Eberhard Grube; Keith Dawkins; Giulio Guagliumi; Adrian Banning; Krzysztof Zmudka; Antonio Colombo; Leif Thuesen; Karl Hauptman; Jean Marco; William Wijns; Anita Joshi; Stephen Mascioli Journal: EuroIntervention Date: 2009-03 Impact factor: 6.534
Authors: J Al Suwaidi; P B Berger; C S Rihal; K N Garratt; M R Bell; H H Ting; J F Bresnahan; D E Grill; D R Holmes Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2000-03-15 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Gaku Nakazawa; Aloke V Finn; Marc Vorpahl; Elena R Ladich; Frank D Kolodgie; Renu Virmani Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2011-01-25 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Manuel Pan; José Suárez de Lezo; Alfonso Medina; Miguel Romero; José Segura; Djordje Pavlovic; Antonio Delgado; Soledad Ojeda; Francisco Melián; Juan Herrador; Isabel Ureña; Luis Burgos Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2004-11 Impact factor: 4.749