Kissing drug eluting balloons for in‐stent restenosis complicating bifurcations treated with drug‐eluting stents

The management of in‐stent restenosis (ISR) complicating bifurcation lesions is technically challenging and implant of further stents may not be feasible. The use of drug‐eluting balloons provides an attractive option for treatment of such lesions allowing a technically simple procedure without the need for further complex stenting. The SeQuent Please paclitaxel‐eluting balloon (B. Braun, Berlin, Germany) has been shown to be superior to a paclitaxel eluting stent or balloon angioplasty for ISR complicating a bare‐metal stent. However, there is no data on the efficacy of the SeQuent Please in ISR complicating drug‐eluting stents or bifurcation lesions. We report two cases where the SeQuent Please was used in this setting with angiographic success and freedom from target vessel failure and angina at 24 months. In both cases the Sheathless Eau Cath guide (Asahi Intecc, Japan) was employed to perform a kissing‐balloon dilatation with the SeQuent Please, so allowing treatment via radial access. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Angiographic and Clinical Outcomes after Implantation of Drug Eluting Stents in Bifurcation Lesions with Crush or Kissing Stent Technique

Background

Long‐term outcome after bifurcation stenting with drug‐eluting stents (DES) for obstructive coronary artery disease is poorly understood. In this study, we report 6–9‐month angiographic follow‐up and long‐term clinical outcomes after implantation of drug‐eluting stents by crush and kissing stent technique for coronary bifurcation lesions.

Methods

Consecutive patients undergoing bifurcation stenting with DES by crush or kissing stent technique were enrolled in a prospective registry. Angiographic follow‐up was obtained at 6–9 months and clinical follow‐up completed for a median of 38 months.

Results

A total of 86 patients participated in the study. Bifurcation stenting by crush technique was performed in 73 (85%) and by kissing stent in 13 (15%) patients. Stenting of left main bifurcation was applied in 24 (28%) patients. Angiographic follow‐up was completed in 75 (87%) patients and showed restenosis in the main for 8 (11%) and side branch for 20 (27%) patients. Clinical follow‐up was available for a median duration of 38 months. During follow‐up, 2 (2%) patients died, 4 (5%) experienced myocardial infarction (MI), and 11 (13%) underwent target vessel revascularization (TVR) with an overall major adverse cardiac event (MACE) rate of 16%. In left main cohort, angiographic restenosis occurred in 9 (37%) patients, and 3 (12%) patients required TVR. There were no deaths or stent thrombosis. A comparison of crush and kissing stent technique showed significantly higher angiographic restenosis with crush (26% vs 13% in kissing stent patients, P = 0.046) and 95% of restenosis in crush group involved ostium of the side branch. There was no difference in clinical outcomes between the crush and kissing stent groups. Final kissing balloon dilatation (FKB) was successful in 65 (89%) patients in the crush group and associated with a significant reduction in MACE (8% in FKB successful vs 37% in FKB unsuccessful, P = 0.04) during follow‐up.

Conclusion

Bifurcation stenting with crush or kissing stent technique is safe and associated with a low rate of TLR and MACE on long‐term follow‐up. Crush stenting is associated with a significantly higher rate of side branch restenosis compared to kissing stent technique. FKB is associated with significant reduction in MACE during follow‐up. (J Interven Cardiol 2013;26:145–152)

     

Comparison of zotarolimus‐ versus everolimus‐eluting stents in the treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions

Objectives : To compare zotarolimus‐eluting stent (Endeavor Sprint®; ZES‐S) and the everolimus‐eluting stent (Xience V®; EES) in the treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions Background : Both these stents have demonstrated good outcomes in the treatment of coronary lesions. However, the outcomes with respect to treatment of bifurcation lesions have yet to be conclusively demonstrated. Methods : In this single centered, nonrandomized, open label study, we treated, between August 2006 and December 2008, 110 bifurcations with ZES‐S and, in a second stage of the study, 129 bifurcations with EES. The primary end point was to compare the rate of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (death, myocardial infarction, and new target lesion revascularization) in‐hospital and at 12 months of follow‐up. Provisional T stenting was the strategy used in the majority of cases. Angiographic follow‐up was performed only in patients who presented signs or symptoms suggestive of angina or ischemia. Results : There were no significant differences in in‐hospital MACE between the groups (ZES‐S: 8.1%; EES: 6.2%; P = 0.5). At 12 months, the ZES‐S group had significantly more MACE than the EES group (23.1% vs. 4.5%; P < 0.001) and an elevated index of new revascularization of the bifurcation (17.5% vs. 3.2%; P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in mortality (four patients in ZES‐S vs. one in EES; P = 0.14). Conclusion : The treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions using everolimus‐eluting stents results in better outcomes at 12 months of follow‐up than zotarolimus‐eluting stents. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Three‐year outcome of drug‐eluting stent implantation for coronary artery bifurcation lesions

Objectives: To compare the very long‐term clinical outcomes of bifurcation lesions using the crush and the simultaneous kissing stent (SKS) techniques. Background: A variety of two‐stent techniques have been used to treat coronary artery bifurcation lesions in the drug‐eluting stent era, but the long‐term clinical outcome of these approaches is not known. Methods: A total of 74 consecutive patients underwent bifurcation stenting using either the crush or SKS techniques. Mean patient age was 66.91 ± 11.3 years; 26% were diabetic, and the left anterior descending/diagonal bifurcation was the most frequently treated lesion (68%). Results: In‐hospital outcomes were not significantly different between groups. Over a median follow‐up of 3.3 years, 1 patient in the SKS group and 3 patients in the crush group died (P = ns). Probable stent thrombosis leading to death according to the Academic Research Consortium definition occurred in 1 patient in the crush group. Mortality in the remaining 3 patients was noncardiac. Target lesion revascularization (TLR) occurred in 14 patients (40%) in the SKS group and 5 patients (12.8%) in the crush group (P = 0.015). Survival free from major adverse cardiac events (MACE) was significantly less in the SKS group and predominantly driven by TLR (60 vs. 88%, P = 0.001). Conclusions: In conclusion, over a median of 3.3 years of follow‐up, TLR and MACE are significantly lower in bifurcation lesions treated with the crush technique when compared with the SKS technique. Definite or probable stent thrombosis is rare with either technique. © 2009 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Drug eluting stenting in bifurcation coronary lesions long-term results applying a systematic treatment strategy

Objectives : To explore the long‐term results following implantation of drug‐eluting stents (DES) in bifurcation lesions according to contemporary “real world” practice. Background : Limited information is available on the long‐term outcomes of patients with bifurcation lesions who are treated using DES. A systematic approach for bifurcation lesion management was applied, using either a “provisional” single stent technique or a dedicated two stents strategy according to the side‐branch diameter and severity of its ostial stenosis. Methods : Four hundred one consecutive patients underwent bifurcation percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using DES and were included in our prospective registry. All adverse events were recorded up to 2 years and distinguished according to the planned PCI strategy (e.g., one versus two stents technique). Results : A planned two stents strategy was used in 141 patients (35% of patients). In 260 patients (65%), the planned treatment involved stenting of the main branch only with “provisional” stenting of the side‐branch according to procedural course. Thus, 24 patients (9.2%) needed additional stenting at the side‐branch to complete the PCI. Cumulative major adverse cardiac event rate at 1 and 2 years was similar for both groups (11.4% vs. 14.8% at 1 year and 19.4% vs. 25.7% at 2 years for the single vs. two stents groups, accordingly, P = NS for both). Likewise, there was no difference in mortality, cardiac mortality, myocardial infarction, need for target lesions or target vessel revascularization, or definite stent thrombosis rate between the two groups at 6, 12, and 2 years follow‐up. The rate of angiographically confirmed (i.e., definite) stent thrombosis did not differ between the two groups during follow‐up. Conclusions : Our study revealed favorable long‐term clinical results following DES implantation using a systematic, rather simplified approach towards bifurcation stenting and using either a single or double stenting technique. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Long‐term risk of clinical events from stenting side branches of coronary bifurcation lesions with drug‐eluting and bare‐metal stents: An observational meta‐analysis

Objectives : To compare the long‐term risks of coronary bifurcation lesions treated with side‐branch stenting using drug‐eluting versus bare‐metal stents. Background : Side‐branch stenting is an off‐label practice, but when needed, the incidence of late adverse events may differ between drug‐eluting and bare‐metal stents. Methods : We systematically searched PubMed, and the National Institutes of Health and Cochrane Registries for studies of coronary bifurcation stenting reporting clinical outcomes over at least 5 months. Data were extracted and cross checked independently by two investigators for inclusion in an observational meta‐analysis. Clinical outcomes included major adverse clinical events (MACE), death, myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization (TVR), and definite stent thrombosis. We used random‐effects models and meta‐regression in 6,825 subjects from 42 studies. Results : Most (79%) of the heterogeneity in MACE between treatment groups was explained by differences in stent type, side‐branch stenting, and length of follow‐up. Compared with drug‐eluting stents without side‐branch stenting, drug‐eluting stents with side‐branch stenting had a 3% higher incidence of myocardial infarction [95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.3%, 5%, P < 0.05], but no significant increase in MACE, death, TVR, or stent thrombosis. Bare‐metal stenting without side‐branch stenting had 10% (95% CI = 3%, 16%, P < 0.01) higher MACE, and 10% (95% CI = 4%, 17%, P < 0.01) higher TVR, whereas bare‐metal side‐branch stenting had 31% (95% CI = 23%, 39%, P < 0.001) higher MACE, and 19% (95% CI = 10%, 28%, P < 0.001) higher TVR. Conclusions : Side‐branch stenting has a much smaller impact on long‐term MACE with drug‐eluting stents compared with bare‐metal stents. Although this study does not support routine side‐branch stenting, when side‐branch stenting is required, drug‐eluting stents are associated with less adverse outcomes.© 2011 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Percutaneous therapy of bifurcation lesions with drug‐eluting stent implantation: the Culotte technique revisited

INTRODUCTION: The most effective strategy for bifurcation stenting is currently undefined. The Culotte technique was developed as a method that ensures complete bifurcation lesion coverage. However, it went out of favour due to a high rate of restenosis when utilizing bare metal stents. Drug‐eluting stents reduce the rate of restenosis and need for repeat lesion revascularization compared with bare metal stents; we re‐evaluated this technique with drug‐eluting stent implantation. METHODS: Between April 2002 and October 2003, 207 patients were treated for at least one bifurcation lesion with drug‐eluting stent implantation to both the main vessel and side branch. Of these, 23 were treated with the Culotte technique (11.1%) for 24 lesions. Sirolimus‐eluting stents were used in 8.3%, and paclitaxel‐eluting stents in the remaining 92.7%. RESULTS: Clinical follow‐up was obtained in 100%. One patient had a myocardial infarction at 14 days (maximum rise in creatine kinase 872IU/L) related to thrombosis occurring in another lesion, and underwent repeat revascularization. There were no episodes of stent thrombosis in the Culotte lesions. At eight months follow‐up, there were no deaths and no further myocardial infarction. One patient required target lesion revascularization (TLR), and a second underwent target vessel revascularization. The cumulative rates of survival‐free of TLR and major adverse cardiac events were 94.7% and 84.6% respectively. Angiographic follow‐up was obtained in 16 patients (69.6%) at a mean period of 8.3±4.3months. The late lumen loss for the main vessel and side branch were 0.48±0.56?mm and 0.53±0.33?mm respectively, with binary restenosis rates of 18.8% and 12.5%.

CONCLUSIONS: In this small study of bifurcation stenting utilizing the Culotte technique with drug‐eluting stent implantation, there was a low rate of major adverse events and need for target lesion revascularization at eight months, when compared with historical data of bifurcation stenting with bare metal stents. Further re‐evaluation of this technique utilizing drug‐eluting stents, is warranted in the setting of larger randomized studies.     

应用双药物洗脱支架治疗分叉病变的近远期临床疗效

目的探讨应用双药物洗脱支架（DES）治疗分叉病变的临床疗效。方法选择分支开口有严重狭窄且分支口径≥2．50mm的分叉病变患者为本研究的入选对象。2003年10月至2005年6月共入选应用双DES治疗分叉病变的患者112例,113处病变。分叉病变的类型为前降支／对角支62例（54．9％）,左冠状动脉主干分叉病变32例（28．3％）,回旋支／钝缘支18例（15．9％）,右冠状动脉远端分叉病变1例。113处分叉病变中采用Crush技术64处,“T”型支架置入27处;改良“Y”型支架置入11处;对吻支架置入5处;“V”型支架置入和Culotte技术置入各3处。结果入选112例患者113处分叉病变中（226处病变）使用Cypher或Cypher select DES 91个,TAXUS DES 74个,Firebird DES 67个。64处分叉病变采用Crush技术置入双支架后60处（93．7％）完成了最后的对吻球囊扩张技术。手术成功率为100％。住院期间1例发生亚急性血栓致急性心肌梗死（AMI）,再次介入治疗成功。住院期间心脏事件发生率（MACE,包括死亡、AMI、再次血管重建）为0．89％（1／112）。112例均完成了9个月的临床随访,无死亡发生,1例发生AMI由晚期血栓形成所致。48例完成了9个月的冠状动脉造影随访（42．9％）,8例发生了支架内再狭窄,其中1例进行了冠状动脉旁路移植术,5例再次行介入治疗,总再狭窄发生率为16．7％（8／48）。随访期间MACE发生率为8．04％（9／112）。结论本研究结果显示对于分支口径≥2．5mm且口部有严重狭窄性病变的分叉病变,采用双DES治疗是安全的,近、远期临床疗效是满意的。与Cypher DES相比较,TAXUS DES的再狭窄发生率有增加的趋势。     

Bifurcation lesions.

The introduction of drug-eluting stents has significantly improved the immediate and long-term results following treatment of bifurcation coronary lesions. Despite these improvements, few questions are still without a clear answer. Among them the most important one is the need to use two stents vs provisional side branch stenting in true bifurcations. At present time the approach most frequently applied is to stent the main branch stenting to the side branch only for suboptimal results. In situations when the operator needs two stents as intention to treat we suggest the usage of the "Crush" or "V" technique. These two approaches have been utilized with good immediate and long-term results with sirolimus-eluting stents and with polymer-based paclitaxel-eluting stents. The usage of the "Crush" technique followed by final dilation of the side branch and with kissing balloon inflation has decreased. We recently evaluated results with this technique in 70 patients treated with sirolimus-eluting stents. The 6-month angiographic follow-up was available in 83% of the lesions and restenosis rate was 33% (7% main and side branches and 26% only side branch). No difference was observed in the restenosis rate on the main branch between lesions treated with final kissing balloon inflation and lesions without final kissing inflation (4% in the final kissing group vs 8% in the no final kissing group, p = 1.00). The restenosis rate on the side branch was lower in the final kissing group (17%) in comparison to the no final kissing group (42%) (p = 0.046). Similar results are achieved with polymer-based paclitaxel-eluting stents. The introduction of drug-eluting stents with selective usage of stenting the main and side branches applying the "Crush" or "V" techniques has significantly improved the results compared to bare metal stents in bifurcation lesions.     

应用双药物洗脱支架治疗分叉病变的近期临床疗效

目的探讨应用双药物洗脱支架（DES）治疗分叉病变的临床近期疗效。方法自2003年10月至2005年2月入选应用双DES治疗分叉病变患者71例,72处病变。分叉病变的类型为前降支／对角支45例（62．5％）,左冠状动脉主干分叉病变20例（27．8％）,回旋支／钝缘支6例,右冠状动脉远端分又病变1例。72处分叉病变中采用Crush技术42处,包括标准Crush技术16处和改良Crush26处;“T”型支架置入19处;改良“Y”型支架置入5处;“V”型支架置入3处和Culotte技术3处。结果入选71例患者中男性59例（83．1％）,女性12例,平均年龄57岁。72处分叉病变中（144处病变）使用Cypher或Cypher Select DES 59个,TAXUS DES48个,Firebird DES 25个和金属裸支架24个。72处分叉病变置入双支架后60处（83．3％）完成了对吻球囊扩张技术。手术成功率为100％。住院期间1例发生亚急性血栓致急性心肌梗死（AMI）,再次经皮冠状动脉介入治疗成功。住院期间主要心脏不良事件（MACE,包括死亡、AMI、再次血管重建）发生率为1．4％（1／71）。71例中16例完成了6个月的临床随访,无死亡和AMI发生,1例6个月时冠状动脉造影显示对角支口部完全闭塞,随访期间MACE发生率为6．3％（1／16）。结论本研究结果显示对于分支口径〉2．5mm且口部有严重狭窄性病变的分叉病变,采用双DES治疗是安全的,近期临床疗效十分满意,远期临床疗效初步显示也是满意的,但仍有待进一步证实。     

Decreased risk of stent fracture‐related restenosis between paclitaxel‐eluting stents and sirolimus eluting stents: Results of long‐term follow‐up

Objective: To compare the outcomes between paclitaxel‐eluting stents (PES) and sirolimus‐eluting stents (SES) for the treatment of drug‐eluting stent (DES) fracture. Background: DES fracture is considered as an important predictor of in‐stent restenosis (ISR). However, little data are available evaluating the optimal treatment for this complication of coronary stenting. Methods: From January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2008, patients with DES ISR treated with a second DES were identified and evaluated for stent fracture. Stent fracture was defined by the presence of strut separation in multiple angiographic projections, assessed by two independent reviewers. Target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 6 and 12 months were the primary end points. Results: Of 131 lesions with DES ISR treated with a second DES, we found 24 patients (24 lesions, 18.2%) with angiographically confirmed stent fracture. Of these, 20 patients (20 lesions) treated with either PES (n = 11/55%) or SES (n = 9/45%) were included in the study. TLR at 6 months occurred in 9% of patients treated with PES and 22% of those treated with SES (P = 0.41). After 12 months, TLR was 9% and 55.5%, respectively (P = 0.024). Conclusions: This study demonstrates a high incidence of stent fracture in patients presenting with DES ISR in need of further treatment with another DES. The suggested association between treatment of stent fracture‐associated DES ISR with PES as compared with SES, and better long‐term outcomes, is in need of confirmation by larger prospective registries and randomized trials. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

To kiss or not to kiss? Impact of final kissing-balloon inflation on early and long-term results of percutaneous coronary intervention for bifurcation lesions

Final kissing-balloon inflation is often recommended for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of bifurcation lesions. However, randomized trials focusing on kissing inflation have not confirmed its beneficial impact. We compared outcomes of kissing inflation for PCI of bifurcation lesions, explicitly stratifying results according to stenting strategy. Patients undergoing bifurcation PCI were retrospectively enrolled. Subjects receiving final kissing inflation were compared with those not undergoing kissing inflation, after stratification for a single-stent technique. The primary end point was the long-term rate of major adverse cardiac events (MACE, i.e., death, myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization (TLR)). A total of 4314 patients were included: 1176 (27.3 %) treated with a single stent and kissing inflation, 1637 (37.9 %) with a single stent but no kissing, 1072 (24.8 %) with two stents and kissing, and 429 (9.9 %) with two stents but no kissing. At unadjusted analyses kissing was associated with fewer short-term MACE and deaths in the two-stent group, and with fewer long-term MACE, cardiac deaths, and side-branch TLR in the two-stent group (all P < 0.05). Conversely, kissing appeared detrimental after single stenting. However, after multivariable analyses, kissing no longer significantly affected the risk of adverse events, with the exception of the risk of side-branch TLR, which was lower in those receiving two stents and final kissing inflation (hazard ratio = 0.52, 95 % confidence interval 0.30–0.90, P = 0.020). Kissing inflation can be avoided in bifurcation lesions uneventfully treated with single-stent PCI. However, final kissing-balloon inflation appears beneficial in reducing the risk of side-branch repeat revascularization after using a two-stent strategy.     

Crush Stenting With Drug‐Eluting Stents: Relevance of Coronary Bifurcation Lesion Location on Angiographic and Clinical Outcomes

Background

Data on the relevance of the location of coronary bifurcation lesions treated by crush stenting with outcomes were limited.

Hypothesis

We hypothesized that the location of the bifurcation lesion correlated with clinical outcome.

Method

A total of 212 patients with 230 true bifurcation lesions treated by crush stenting with drug‐eluting stents (DES) were assessed prospectively. Surveillance quantitative angiographies were indexed at 8 months after procedure. Primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization (TLR).

Results

Patients in the distal right coronary artery (RCAd) group were characterized by higher proportions of prior myocardial infarction and very tortuous lesions. However, lesions in the RCAd group, compared to those of other groups, had the lowest late lumen loss, with resultant lowest incidence of MACE at a mean follow‐up of 268±35 days. Independent predictors of MACE included unsatisfied kissing (KUS; hazard ratio [HR]: 12.14, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.01–12.10, P = .001) and non‐RCA lesion (HR: 20.69, 95% CI: 5.05–22.38, P = .001), while those of TLR were KUS (HR: 10.21, 95% CI: 0.01–0.34, P = .002), bifurcation angle (HR: 4.728, 95% CI: 2.541–4.109, P = .001), and non‐RCA lesion (HR: 16.05, 95%CI: 1.01–4.83, P = .001).

Conclusions

Classical crush stenting with drug‐eluting stents is associated with significantly better outcomes in RCAd. Quality of kissing inflation is mandatory to improve outcome. Copyright © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Unprotected left main disease managed with drug‐eluting stents: Long‐term outcome of 100 patients with increased surgical risk

Objectives : The purpose of this study was to determine long‐term clinical outcomes in high surgical risk patients (pts) with unprotected left main (ULM) disease who were managed with drug‐eluting stents (DES). Background : The long‐term efficacy of unprotected left main (ULM) stenting with DES remains uncertain. Methods : From June 2003 to December 2005, 100 pts with increased surgical risk underwent ULM stenting with DES. Patient risk was estimated by EuroSCORE. Disease was confined to the ostium/main stem in Group A (31 pts) and involved the bifurcation in Group B (69 pts). Study endpoints were MI, TVR, and death. Results : Mean age was 68 ± 1 years, EF 52 ± 1%. Mean EuroSCORE was 5.2 ± 0.4, and 41% pts had a EuroSCORE of >6. In Group A, 87% of lesions were directly stented. In Group B, 61% of pts received one stent and 39% received two stents. Primary success was 95%. Follow‐up data (mean 28 ± 1 months) were obtained in all patients. Restenosis occurred at the proximal stent margin in 5/9 pts. There were 12 cardiac deaths (88% cardiac survival) and 9 noncardiac deaths (79% total survival). In Group B, 5 pts died suddenly: 3 within the first week and 2 additional pts after 1 year. Sudden death did not occur in Group A. All cause event‐free survival was 65% in Group A and 67% in Group B. Conclusion : A substantial number of late adverse events occurred in both ostial and bifurcation groups with equal frequency. Until definitive data from randomized trials are available, ULM stenting should be performed only in patients with prohibitive surgical risk. © 2008 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Drug‐eluting stents in bifurcation lesions: To stent one branch or both?

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to compare two techniques to treat bifurcation lesions: a single drug-eluting stent (DES) implanted in the main branch combined with balloon dilatation for the side branch vs. stenting of both branches (double stent). BACKGROUND: Percutaneous coronary intervention in coronary bifurcation lesions remains challenging. Although DES reduce restenosis in lesions, the double stent procedure has not shown clear advantages over a single stent with balloon dilation. METHODS: Fifty-three symptomatic patients with true bifurcation lesions were treated using either the double stent technique (n = 25) or one stent in the parent vessel plus balloon angioplasty of the side branch (n = 28). Procedural results and major adverse cardiac event rates (MACE: cardiac death, myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization (TVR)) were compared. RESULTS: Angiographic procedural success (residual stenosis <30% in both branches) was 75% in the single stent group and 100% in the double stent group (P = 0.01). All differences were due to residual stenosis of the side branch. Clinical follow-up (6-18 months) was available for all patients; 90.5% of patients had a coronary angiography or nuclear stress test. Three patients (11%) in the single stent group and two (8%) in the double stent group had ischemia-driven TVR (P = NS). Asymptomatic angiographic restenosis (>50% diameter stenosis) in the ostium of the side branch was seen in two patients in the double-stent group. At 6 months, MACE-free was comparable between groups (89.3% vs. 88%, P = 0.7). CONCLUSIONS: When treating bifurcation lesions with sirolimus-eluting stents, restenosis following a single stent procedure is comparable to stenting both parent and side branch vessels. Thus, stenting the main-branch lesion, coupled with balloon angioplasty in the side branch, produces a high success rate and good clinical outcomes at 6 months.     

Predictors of restenosis after treatment of bifurcational lesions with paclitaxel eluting stents: a multicenter prospective registry of 150 consecutive patients.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was the assessment of the clinical, angiographic and procedural characteristics correlated with freedom from adverse events at 1 year in a real life setting of consecutive bifurcation lesions. BACKGROUND: Even if stent implantation has shown to be superior to conventional balloon angioplasty in most coronary lesions, bifurcation treatment with stent implantation both in main and in side branch (SB) still raises controversy. METHODS: We reviewed the results obtained in a prospective multicenter registry of 150 patients with 158 bifurcation lesions involving a SB of sufficient diameter to be treated, if necessary, with a polymer based paclitaxel eluting stent (PES, TAXUS). Two stents were used in 118 lesions (74.7%). Final kissing balloon inflation was performed in 87/118 lesions (73.7%) and in 30/40 lesions (75.0%) of the 2 and 1 stent group respectively. RESULTS: At 1-year clinical follow-up we observed 4 stent thromboses, all involving the SBs of the 2 stents group (2.7%). Unlike previous reports, revascularization involved the main vessel in the majority of patients (21/150, 14.0%). After an exploratory multivariable analysis the only parameter predictive of target lesion revascularization (TLR) (HR 0.52; CI 95% 0.11-0.86; p = 0.02) and target vessel revascularization (TVR) (HR 0.47; CI 95% 0.14-0.90; p = 0.03) was postprocedural main branch minimal lumen diameter (MB-MLD). CONCLUSIONS: In a real life setting of consecutive bifurcation lesions, thrombosis rate, concentrated in the SB and the 2-stents group, and need for target lesion revascularization remain higher than in less complex lesion subgroups treated with PES. No differences in immediate success and TLR were observed between 2 stents and 1 stent groups. The frequently observed suboptimal stent expansion and final MB-MLD predict 1 year revascularization.     

雷帕霉素洗脱支架与紫杉醇涂层支架治疗冠状动脉复杂病变

目的评价雷帕霉素洗脱支架(CypherTM)与紫杉醇涂层支架(Taxus ExpressTM)治疗冠状动脉复杂病变(B2／C型病变)的近期和远期疗效。方法入选本研究267例,男性占68％,糖尿病占38．5％。雷帕霉素洗脱支架组169例,共植入雷帕霉素洗脱支架172条;紫杉醇涂层支架组98例,植入紫杉醇涂层支架165条。观察6个月的主要心血管事件。结果两组的临床特征相似。支架植入成功率100％,95％的病人完成6个月的随访。主要心血管事件发生率:雷帕霉素洗脱支架组5．9％(10／169),紫杉醇涂层支架组9．2％(9／98),两组差异无统计学意义(X2=1．001,P=0．317)。结论雷帕霉素洗脱支架治疗冠状动脉复杂病变疗效和安全性与紫杉醇涂层支架相似。     

Lack of long‐term clinical benefit of thrombus aspiration during primary percutaneous coronary intervention with paclitaxel‐eluting stents or bare‐metal stents: Post‐hoc analysis of the PASSION‐trial

Background : Although current clinical guidelines recommend the use of thrombus aspiration (TA) during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI), previous studies evaluating TA demonstrated contradictory results. The aim of this study was to evaluate long‐term clinical outcome after TA in adjunct to PPCI for acute ST‐segment myocardial infarction (STEMI), as compared with conventional treatment, with the use of paclitaxel‐eluting stents or bare‐metal stents. Methods : We analyzed data of the PASSION trial, in which 619 patients with STEMI were randomly assigned to a paclitaxel‐eluting stent or a bare‐metal stent. TA was performed in 311 patients (50.2%). Clinical endpoints at 2 years were compared between patients who received TA during PPCI with patients who underwent conventional PPCI. The primary outcome of interest was a composite of cardiac death, recurrent myocardial infarction (MI), or target‐lesion revascularization (TLR). A propensity score model was made to account for baseline differences that could have affected the probability of performing TA. Results : Complete follow‐up was available for 598 patients (96.6%). The cumulative incidence of the combined outcome measure of cardiac death, recurrent MI, or TLR was 40 (13.0%) in the TA group and 41 (13.5%) in the conventional PPCI group (HR 0.96; 95% CI 0.62–1.47; P = 0.84). Also after adjusting for propensity score, no significant difference in event rate was observed between both treatment groups. Conclusions : In this post‐hoc analysis of the PASSION trial, TA in adjunct to PPCI did not affect rates of major adverse cardiac events at 2 years follow‐up, as compared with conventional PPCI. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Long‐Term Clinical Outcomes of the One‐Stent Technique versus the Two‐Stent Technique for Non‐Left Main True Coronary Bifurcation Disease in the Era of Drug‐Eluting Stents

Background

Few studies have compared the long‐term major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) between the one‐stent technique (stenting only the main branch) and the two‐stent technique (stenting of both the main and side branches) for the treatment of true coronary bifurcation lesions in the drug‐eluting stent era. Therefore, we investigated this issue using the large nationwide coronary bifurcation registry.

Methods

The 1,147 patients with non‐left main coronary true bifurcation lesions underwent percutaneous coronary intervention in the Korea Coronary Bifurcation Stent (COBIS) registry. All patients were stratified based on the stent placement technique: one stent (n = 898) versus two stents (n = 249). MACE, including death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), and repeat vessel and lesion revascularization (TVR and TLR), were evaluated.

Results

The median follow‐up duration was 20 months. The MACEs did not differ between the 2 groups. Findings from the one‐stent group were similar to those of the two‐stent group in composite of death, MI, or TVR, based on analysis by crude, multivariate Cox hazard regression model, inverse‐probability‐of‐treatment weighting (hazard ratio [HR] 0.911, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.614–1.351; HR 0.685 95% CI 0.381–1.232; HR 1.235, 95% CI 0.331–4.605, respectively). In further analysis with propensity score matching, the overall findings were consistent.

Conclusions

The findings of the present study indicate that the one‐stent technique was not inferior to the two‐stent technique for the treatment of non‐left main true coronary bifurcation lesions in terms of long‐term MACEs. (J Interven Cardiol 2013;26:245–253)

     

Five‐year long‐term clinical follow‐up of the XIENCE V everolimus eluting coronary stent system in the treatment of patients with de novo coronary artery lesions: The SPIRIT FIRST trial

Background : Drug‐eluting stents have shown to be superior over bare metal stents in clinical and angiographic outcomes after percutaneous treatment of coronary artery stenosis. However, long‐term follow‐up data are scarce and only available for sirolimus‐ and paclitaxel‐eluting stents. Aim : To assess the feasibility and performance of the XIENCE V everolimus‐eluting stent (EES) versus an identical bare metal stent after a 5‐year follow‐up period. Methods : SPIRIT FIRST was a First in Man, multicentre, prospective, single‐blind, clinical trial, randomizing 60 patients with a single de novo coronary artery lesion in a ratio of 1:1 to either an everolimus eluting or a bare metal control stent. Results : At 5‐year clinical follow‐up, data were available in 89% and 86% of patients in the everolimus and control arm, respectively. In the everolimus arm, no additional death, myocardial infarction, clinically driven target lesion revascularization (TLR), or clinically driven target vessel revascularization (TVR) events were observed between 1‐ and 5‐year follow‐up. The 5‐year hierarchical major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and target vessel failure (TVF) rates for the everolimus arm were 16.7% (4/24) for both endpoints. In the control group, no additional cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or clinically driven TLR events were observed between 2‐ and 5‐year follow‐up. No additional clinically driven TVR events were observed between 3‐ and 5‐year follow‐up. The 5‐year hierarchical MACE and TVF rates for the control arm were 28.0% (7/25) and 36.0% (9/25), respectively. No stent thromboses were observed in either the everolimus arm or the control arm up to 5 years. Conclusion : The favorable 5‐year long term clinical outcome of the EES is consistent with the results from other studies of the EES with shorter follow‐up. © 2010 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.