Literature DB >> 32069106

Prognostic Effects of Treatment Strategies for Left Main Versus Non-Left Main Bifurcation Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Current-Generation Drug-Eluting Stent.

Ki Hong Choi1, Young Bin Song1, Joo Myung Lee1, Taek Kyu Park1, Jeong Hoon Yang1, Joo-Yong Hahn1, Jin-Ho Choi1, Seung-Hyuk Choi1, Hyo-Soo Kim2, Woo Jung Chun3, Seung-Ho Hur4, Seung Hwan Han5, Seung-Woon Rha6, In-Ho Chae7, Jin-Ok Jeong8, Jung Ho Heo9, Junghan Yoon10, Do-Sun Lim11, Jong-Seon Park12, Myeong-Ki Hong13, Joon-Hyung Doh14, Kwang Soo Cha15, Doo-Il Kim16, Sang Yeub Lee17, Kiyuk Chang18, Byung-Hee Hwang19, So-Yeon Choi20, Myung Ho Jeong21, Soon-Jun Hong11, Chang-Wook Nam, Bon-Kwon Koo2, Hyeon-Cheol Gwon1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although 1-stent with provisional approach is the preferred strategy for the treatment of bifurcation lesions, the optimal treatment strategy according to lesion location is still debatable. This study aimed to identify whether clinical outcomes according to treatment strategy differed between left main (LM) and non-LM bifurcation lesions in the second-generation drug-eluting stent era.
METHODS: The Coronary Bifurcation Stenting registry III is a retrospective multicenter registry of 2648 patients with bifurcation lesions who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with second-generation drug-eluting stent. Among the study population, 935 (35.3%) patients had an LM bifurcation lesion. The primary outcome was target lesion failure, a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization.
RESULTS: Median follow-up duration was 53 months. LM bifurcation was associated with a higher risk of target lesion failure (HRadj, 1.846 [95% CI, 1.317-2.588]; P<0.001) than non-LM bifurcation. Two-stent strategy was more frequently applied in patients with LM bifurcation than in patients with non-LM bifurcation (27.1% versus 11.7%; P<0.001). In the LM bifurcation group, compared with the 1-stent strategy, the 2-stent strategy showed a significantly higher risk of target lesion failure (2-stent versus 1-stent, 17.4% versus 10.6%; HRadj, 1.848 [95% CI, 1.045-3.266]; P=0.035), mainly driven by the higher rate of target lesion revascularization (15.3% versus 5.5%; HRadj, 2.698 [95% CI, 1.276-5.706]; P=0.009). However, the risk of cardiac death or myocardial infarction did not differ between the 2 groups (4.4% versus 6.6%; HRadj, 0.694 [95% CI, 0.306-1.572]; P=0.381). For patients with non-LM-bifurcation, there was no significant difference in the rate of target lesion failure between 1-stent and 2-stent strategies (5.6% versus 6.3%; HRadj, 0.925 [95% CI, 0.428-2.001]; P=0.843).
CONCLUSIONS: Even in the second-generation drug-eluting stent era, the 1-stent strategy, if possible, should initially be considered the preferred approach for the treatment of LM bifurcation lesions. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT03068494.

Entities:  

Keywords:  drug-eluting stents; myocardial infarction; percutaneous coronary intervention; registries; stents

Year:  2020        PMID: 32069106     DOI: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.119.008543

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Interv        ISSN: 1941-7640            Impact factor:   6.546


  6 in total

Review 1.  One- and 3-year outcomes of percutaneous bifurcation left main revascularization with modern drug-eluting stents: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Gianluca Rigatelli; Marco Zuin; Pavel Nikolov; Nyha Mileva; Dobrin Vassilev
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2020-05-30       Impact factor: 5.460

2.  Practice Patterns in the Interventional Treatment of Coronary Bifurcation Lesions: A Global Survey.

Authors:  Ilias Nikolakopoulos; Evangelia Vemmou; Judit Karacsonyi; Lorenzo Azzalini; Brian A Bergmark; Yiannis S Chatzizisis; Allison B Hall; Jason Wollmuth; Kevin Croce; Hani Jneid; Bavana V Rangan; M Nicholas Burke; Emmanouil S Brilakis
Journal:  J Invasive Cardiol       Date:  2022-01       Impact factor: 2.022

3.  Ten-Year Trends in Coronary Bifurcation Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Prognostic Effects of Patient and Lesion Characteristics, Devices, and Techniques.

Authors:  Joo Myung Lee; Seung Hun Lee; Juwon Kim; Ki Hong Choi; Taek Kyu Park; Jeong Hoon Yang; Young Bin Song; Joo-Yong Hahn; Jin-Ho Choi; Seung-Hyuk Choi; Hyo-Soo Kim; Woo Jung Chun; Chang-Wook Nam; Seung-Ho Hur; Seung Hwan Han; Seung-Woon Rha; In-Ho Chae; Jin-Ok Jeong; Jung Ho Heo; Junghan Yoon; Do-Sun Lim; Jong-Seon Park; Myeong-Ki Hong; Joon-Hyung Doh; Kwang Soo Cha; Doo-Il Kim; Sang Yeub Lee; Kiyuk Chang; Byung-Hee Hwang; So-Yeon Choi; Myung Ho Jeong; Soon-Jun Hong; Bon-Kwon Koo; Hyeon-Cheol Gwon
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2021-09-13       Impact factor: 5.501

4.  Percutaneous coronary artery intervention in unprotected left main coronary artery disease: one-year outcome Egyptian registry.

Authors:  Rana Ayman; Sameh Mohamed Shaheen; Sameh Saleh Sabet; Yasser A Abdellatif
Journal:  Egypt Heart J       Date:  2022-09-06

5.  Effect of Stenting Strategy on the Outcome in Patients with Non-Left Main Bifurcation Lesions.

Authors:  Yongwhan Lim; Min Chul Kim; Youngkeun Ahn; Doo Sun Sim; Young Joon Hong; Ju Han Kim; Myung Ho Jeong; Hyeon-Cheol Gwon; Hyo-Soo Kim; Seung Woon Rha; Jung Han Yoon; Yangsoo Jang; Seung-Jea Tahk; Ki Bae Seung
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-09-26       Impact factor: 4.964

6.  Short- and Long-Term Outcomes of Left Main Coronary Artery Stenting in Patients Disqualified from Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery.

Authors:  Wojciech Jan Skorupski; Marta Kałużna-Oleksy; Maciej Lesiak; Aleksander Araszkiewicz; Włodzimierz Skorupski; Stefan Grajek; Przemysław Mitkowski; Małgorzata Pyda; Marek Grygier
Journal:  J Pers Med       Date:  2022-02-25
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.