Sirolimus-eluting stent implantation for unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis: comparison with bare metal stent implantation

OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to compare the clinical and angiographic outcomes of sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) and bare metal stent (BMS) implantation for unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenosis. BACKGROUND: The safety and effectiveness of SES implantation for unprotected LMCA stenosis have not been ascertained. METHODS: Elective SES implantation for de novo unprotected LMCA stenosis was performed in 102 consecutive patients with preserved left ventricular function from March 2003 to March 2004. Data from this group were compared to those from 121 patients treated with BMS during the preceding two years. RESULTS: Compared to the BMS group, the SES group received more direct stenting, had fewer debulking atherectomies, had a greater number of stents, had more segments stented, and underwent more bifurcation stenting. The procedural success rate was 100% for both groups. There were no incidents of death, stent thrombosis, Q-wave myocardial infarction (MI), or emergent bypass surgery during hospitalization in either group. Despite less acute gain (2.06 +/- 0.56 mm vs. 2.73 +/- 0.73 mm, p < 0.001) in the SES group, SES patients showed a lower late lumen loss (0.05 +/- 0.57 mm vs. 1.27 +/- 0.90 mm, p < 0.001) and a lower six-month angiographic restenosis rate (7.0% vs. 30.3%, p < 0.001) versus the BMS group. At 12 months, the rate of freedom from death, MI, and target lesion revascularization was 98.0 +/- 1.4% in the SES group and 81.4 +/- 3.7% in the BMS group (p = 0.0003). CONCLUSIONS: Sirolimus-eluting stent implantation for unprotected LMCA stenosis appears safe with regard to acute and midterm complications and is more effective in preventing restenosis compared to BMS implantation.     

Long-term outcome of simultaneous kissing stenting technique with sirolimus-eluting stent for large bifurcation coronary lesions.

OBJECTIVES: This study was conducted to evaluate the outcomes of simultaneous kissing stenting with sirolimus-eluting stent (SES). BACKGROUND: Percutaneous intervention for bifurcation coronary lesions is still challenging. METHODS: This study was designed to evaluate the long-term outcomes of 36 consecutive patients with large bifurcation coronary lesions who underwent simultaneous kissing stenting with SES. RESULTS: Lesion location was unprotected left main in 29 patients (81%) and anterior descending artery in 7 (19%). The patients received a combination of aspirin and clopidogrel for 6 months and cilostazol for 1 month. Mean proximal reference diameter was 4.05 +/- 0.68 mm. Compared with the side branch (SB), the main vessel (MV) involved longer lesions (25.8 +/- 17.0 mm vs. 10.2 +/- 10.8 mm, P < 0.001) and smaller preprocedural minimal lumen diameters (1.02 +/- 0.53 mm vs. 1.46 +/- 0.78 mm, P = 0.006) and was treated with larger stents (3.1 +/- 0.3 mm vs. 3.0 +/- 0.3 mm, P = 0.006). Angiographic success rate was 100%. Over the follow-up of 26.7 +/- 8.6 months, no deaths, myocardial infarctions or stent thromboses occurred. Target lesion revascularization was performed in five patients (14%). Overall angiographic restenosis occurred in 5/30 patients (17%), consisting of 4 (13%) at MV and 3 (10%) at SB. At follow-up angiography, a membranous diaphragm at the carina was identified in 14 patients (47%), but only one of whom was associated with angiographic restenosis. CONCLUSION: Simultaneous kissing stenting with SES appears a feasible stenting technique in large bifurcation coronary lesions. However, a new angiographic structure of carinal membrane developed in a half of patients at follow-up and its influence needs to be further investigated.     

Technical feasibility,safety, and clinical outcome of stenting of unprotected left main coronary artery bifurcation narrowing

This study was performed to evaluate the acute and long-term results of stenting for unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) bifurcation lesions. Sixty-three consecutive patients with an unprotected LMCA bifurcation lesion and normal left ventricular function were included. Stenting was performed with (n = 32) or without debulking atherectomy (n = 31) at the operator's discretion. Slotted-tube stents, coil stents, or bifurcation stents were used. The procedural success rate was 100%. In-hospital events including stent thrombosis, Q-wave myocardial infarction, and emergency bypass surgery did not occur in any patients. The angiographic follow-up rate was 86% (43 of the 50 eligible patients), and the restenosis rate was 28% (parent vessel only 14%, side branch only 9%, and both 5%). Restenosis at the parent vessel occurred less frequently in the debulking group than in the nondebulking group (5% vs 33%, respectively, p = 0.02). In multivariate analysis, the debulking procedure was an independent predictive factor of restenosis for the parent vessel (odds ratio 0.10, 95% confidence intervals 0.01 to 0.91, p = 0.04). Clinical follow-up was obtained in all patients at 19.9 +/- 13.7 months. There were 2 deaths (noncardiac origin), but no myocardial infarction during follow-up. Target lesion revascularization was required in 6 patients. The event-free survival rate (death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularization) was 86% at the end of the follow-up period. In conclusion, stenting for an unprotected LMCA bifurcation lesion may be performed with a high procedural success rate and a favorable clinical outcome in selected patients with normal left ventricular function, suggesting that stenting would be an effective alternative to surgery in these patients.     

Stenting of unprotected distal left main coronary artery bifurcation stenoses using modified crush technique with double kissing balloon inflation (sleeve technique): immediate procedure result and early clinical outcome

BACKGROUND: Sleeve technique is a modified version of the crush technique. It is specifically designed to increase the success rate of final kissing balloon inflation, which used to be a major limitation of the latter. OBJECTIVE: This study sought to look at the feasibility, safety, and early clinical outcome of sleeve technique in stenting of unprotected distal left main coronary artery (LMCA) bifurcation stenoses. METHODS: From August 2005 to April 2006, 12 consecutive patients with symptomatic distal LMCA bifurcation stenoses of diameter narrowing > or =50%, who refused coronary artery bypass graft surgery, were treated with two-stent strategy using the sleeve technique. RESULTS: Eleven patients (91.7%) were male, with a mean age of 64.4 +/- 9.3 years. Intravenous abciximab was given to 10 patients (83.3%). The baseline reference vessel diameters of the main vessel and side branch were 3.32 +/- 0.44 and 3.00 +/- 0.58 mm, respectively. After intervention, the minimal luminal diameter was increased from 0.99 +/- 0.46 to 3.26 +/- 0.28 mm and 1.43 +/- 0.71 to 2.93 +/- 0.45 mm in the main vessel and side branch, respectively. The intervention procedure was successful in all patients with 100% final kissing balloon inflation rate. The average procedure time was 58.6 +/- 20.5 minutes. Two patients had a small non-Q myocardial infarction postprocedure. The resultant major adverse cardiac event rate was 16.7% at 30 days after the procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Sleeve technique is a safe and feasible approach in the stenting of distal LMCA bifurcation stenoses.     

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)

     

Elective stenting of unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis: effect of debulking before stenting and intravascular ultrasound guidance

OBJECTIVES: We sought to evaluate: 1) the long-term outcomes of 127 selected patients receiving unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenting; and 2) the impact of the debulking procedure before stenting and intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guidance on their clinical outcomes. BACKGROUND: The long-term safety of stenting of unprotected LMCA stenoses has not been established yet. METHODS: A total of 127 consecutive patients with unprotected LMCA stenosis and normal left ventricular function were treated by elective stenting. The long-term outcomes were evaluated between two groups: IVUS guidance (n = 77) vs. angiographic guidance (n = 50); and debulking plus stenting (debulking/stenting; n = 40) vs. stenting only (n = 87). RESULTS: Angiographic restenosis was documented in 19 (19%) of 100 patients. The lumen diameter after stenting was significantly larger in IVUS-guided group (p = 0.003). The angiographic restenosis rate was significantly lower in the debulking/stenting group (8.3% vs. 25%, p = 0.034). The reference artery size was the only independent predictor of angiographic restenosis. During follow-up (25.5 +/- 16.7 months), there were four deaths, but no nonfatal myocardial infarctions occurred. The survival rate was 97.0 +/- 1.7% at two years. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that stenting of unprotected LMCA stenosis might be associated with a favorable long-term outcome in selected patients. Guidance with IVUS may optimize the immediate results, and debulking before stenting seems to be effective in reducing the restenosis rate. However, we need a large-scale, randomized study.     

Sirolimus- versus paclitaxel-eluting stent implantation for unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis

We performed this study in order to compare the immediate and mid-term outcomes of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) in lesions of the unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA). We assessed 54 patients from 5 centers who had undergone unprotected LMCA stenting (35 SES and 19 PES). The procedural success rates were 100 and 95%, respectively, in the SES and PES patients (p = 0.19). At the 6-month clinical follow-up, the event-free probability was 100% in the SES group, and 88% in the PES group (p = 0.07). At the 6-month angiographic follow-up (n = 24), the SES group exhibited a slightly lower late loss than did the PES group (0.24 +/- 0.44 vs. 0.65 +/- 0.60 mm, p = 0.09), and the restenosis rates were 8 and 9% (p = 0.94) in the SES and PES patients, respectively. In conclusion, both groups exhibited excellent in-hospital and 6-month outcomes with no significant differences between them.     

120例无保护左主干冠状动脉病变药物洗脱支架术的临床疗效和随访研究

目的探讨药物洗脱支架(DES)在无保护左主干冠状动脉(LMCA)病变的疗效。方法回顾性分析符合条件连续的120例无保护LMCA病变患者行DES的疗效,将其分为分叉病变组(80例)和非分叉病变组(40例)两组,根据病变特点行单支架术或双支架术,分析其支架术的操作特点,住院期间及出院后随访其主要心脏不良事件(MACE,包括死亡、非致死性心肌梗死及靶病变重建)及支架内血栓形成(ST)的情况。结果两组间的临床基线情况差异无统计学意义,共106(88.3%)例患者完成随访,分叉病变组更多使用血管内超声(IVUS)指导治疗(但P>0.05),分叉病变组33例行双支架术,非分叉病变组5例行双支架术(P=0.001),住院期间无MACE及支架内血栓(ST)发生,出院随访平均(26.3±14.5)个月,MACE11例(9.2%),总共死亡3例(2.8%),都是SYNTAX积分及EuroSCORE均属高危的患者,非致死性心肌梗死2例(1.9%),靶病变重建(TLR)6例(5.7%),造影再狭窄6例(占造影随访患者的15.8%),两组ST各1例,两组间MACE差异无统计学意义(7.5%比12.5%,χ2=0.801,P=0.503)。结论在选择性患者行DES治疗无保护LMCA病变不论是否分叉病变近远期的安全性和有效性可以接受。     

Serial angiographic follow-up of sirolimus-eluting stents for unprotected left main coronary artery revascularization.

OBJECTIVES: This study was performed to evaluate the clinical and serial angiographic outcomes of patients undergoing sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) implantation for unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenosis. BACKGROUND: The efficacy of SES has led to their expanded use for off-label indications, including LMCA disease. METHODS: Unprotected LMCA intervention with SES was attempted in 50 patients. Surveillance angiography was performed at three and nine months' follow-up. RESULTS: The target lesion involved the distal LMCA in 47 patients (94%). In-lesion restenosis occurred in 21 patients (42%), was focal in 85% of cases, and in 82% involved the branch ostia, sparing the LMCA itself. Target lesion revascularization (TLR) occurred in 19 patients (38%) over a mean follow-up of 276 +/- 57 days; TLR was ischemia-driven in 7 patients (14%). Late loss was significantly greater within the left circumflex (LCX) ostium compared to the parent vessel (PV) of the LMCA bifurcation (0.83 +/- 0.89 mm vs. 0.49 +/- 0.72 mm, p = 0.04). Late loss continued to increase between three- and nine-month follow-up. Final minimal luminal diameter and maximal balloon pressure were independent predictors of restenosis of the PV. CONCLUSIONS: Restenosis is a frequent finding when serial angiographic follow-up is performed after SES implantation for unprotected distal LMCA lesions. Restenosis is usually focal, most often involves the LCX ostium, and often occurs without symptoms.     

A prospective registry to evaluate sirolimus-eluting stents implanted at coronary bifurcation lesions using the "crush technique"

The "crush technique" has been proposed as an alternative approach to treat bifurcation lesions because of its predictability and high procedural success rate. However, few data are available regarding its safety and long-term efficacy. We report the long-term clinical outcomes of patients with coronary bifurcation lesions treated with sirolimus-eluting stents using the crush technique. From April 2003 to May 2004, 120 patients with coronary bifurcation lesions were treated with sirolimus-eluting stents using the crush technique. Six months of clinical follow-up was completed in 95.8% of patients. Mean patient age was 64 years; 36% had diabetes mellitus, and the left anterior descending artery/diagonal was the most frequent bifurcation location (69%). Final kissing balloon inflation was performed in 87.5% of patients. Compared with the main vessel, side branch lesions were shorter, with a smaller reference diameter and final in-stent minimum lumen diameter. Procedural success was achieved in 97.5%. At 30 days of follow-up, 1 patient had died of noncardiac causes and 2 patients (1.7%) had subacute stent thrombosis. At 6 months of follow-up, target lesion revascularization was required in 13 patients (11.3%), all of whom had focal restenosis predominantly at the side branch ostium. In conclusion, the crush technique with final kissing balloon inflation can be safely used by experienced operators to treat highly complex bifurcation lesions with sirolimus-eluting stents. The safety profile of this technique is similar to that of other bifurcation stenting techniques reported thus far. Nonetheless, despite the excellent patency rates of the main vessel, the need for revascularization at the ostium of the side branch was not fully eliminated.     

Effectiveness of sirolimus-eluting stent implantation for the treatment of ostial left anterior descending artery stenosis with intravascular ultrasound guidance

OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to evaluate the clinical and angiographic outcomes of sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) implantation for ostial left anterior descending (LAD) lesions compared with bare-metal stent (BMS) implantation. BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of SES implantation for ostial LAD lesions is currently unknown. METHODS: Sirolimus-eluting stents were implanted in 68 consecutive patients with ostial LAD stenoses. The control group was composed of 77 patients treated with BMS during the preceding two years. In the SES group, for complete lesion coverage, stent positioning was intentionally extended into the distal left main coronary artery (LMCA) in 23 patients (34%) with intermediate LMCA narrowing. RESULTS: Compared with the BMS group, the SES group had more multivessel involvement, received fewer debulking atherectomies, underwent more direct stenting, had a greater number of stents, and had more segments stented. The procedural success rate was 100% in both groups. The six-month angiographic restenosis rate was significantly lower in the SES group than in the BMS group (5.1% vs. 32.3%, p < 0.001). During the one-year follow-up period, neither death nor myocardial infarction occurred in either group, but target lesion revascularization was less frequent in the SES group than in the BMS group (0% vs. 17%, p < 0.001). In the SES group, there were no restenoses in cases with LMCA coverage, compared with three restenoses (7.9%) in cases with precise stent positioning (p = NS). CONCLUSIONS: Sirolimus-eluting stent implantation in ostial LAD lesions achieved excellent results regarding restenosis and clinical outcomes compared with BMS implantation. This finding may be associated with reduced neointimal hyperplasia and complete lesion coverage.     

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.     

药物洗脱支架在冠心病无保护左主干病变中的应用

目的评价药物洗脱支架治疗经选择冠心病无保护左主干病变的安全性和有效性。方法2003年1月~2005年6月间,共有48例经选择的冠心病患者,年龄39~81岁,经冠状动脉造影证实为无保护左主干病变(左主干狭窄均≥75%)行介入治疗置入药物洗脱支架。结果48例患者介入治疗均获得成功,共置入药物洗脱支架75枚(51 Cypher,18 Taxus,6 Firebird)。其中左主干开口部狭窄5例(10.4%,5/48),体部狭窄6例(12.5%,6/48),远端分叉部位狭窄37例(77.1%,37/48)。37例远端分叉部位狭窄患者中,主支支架加边支经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)10例,双支架术27例,最后成功对吻球囊扩张30例(81.1%,30/37)。所有患者治疗后临床症状明显缓解或消失,住院及6个月随访期间无严重心血管事件发生,43例患者术后6个月行冠状动脉造影随访,2例患者再狭窄(均为分叉病变)行冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG),冠状动脉造影随访率89.6%,再狭窄率4.7%。结论药物洗脱支架介入治疗冠心病无保护左主干病变安全有效,近中期效果良好。     

Clinical and angiographic outcome after implantation of drug-eluting stents in bifurcation lesions with the crush stent technique: importance of final kissing balloon post-dilation

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this research was to evaluate the long-term outcomes after implantation of drug-eluting stents (DES) in bifurcation lesions with the "crush" technique. BACKGROUND: The long-term outcome of "crush" stenting technique has yet to be determined. METHODS: We identified 181 consecutive patients who were treated with DES with the "crush" stent technique from April 2002 to April 2004. Based on the usage of final kissing balloon post-dilation (FKB), the patients were divided into an FKB group (n = 116) and a non-FKB group (n = 65). RESULTS: Clinical follow-up at nine months was available in all patients, and angiographic follow-up in 80% of patients. Three cases (1.7%) of intraprocedural stent thrombosis and five (2.8%) cases of postprocedural stent thrombosis occurred. Restenosis rate of the main branch in the entire cohort lesions was 11.5%. Restenosis rate of the side branch was lower in the FKB group than that in the non-FKB group (11.1% vs. 37.9%, p < 0.001). The target lesion revascularization (TLR) rate for all patients was 14.9%. The lack of FKB was a predictor for TLR (hazard ratio [HR] 4.17; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.30 to 14.3, p = 0.02). Diabetes was also a predictor for TLR (HR 1.79; 95% CI 1.14 to 2.80, p = 0.01). Premature discontinuation of dual antiplatelet therapy (odds ratio [OR] 16.8; 95% CI 1.31 to 159.5, p = 0.03) and age (OR 1.10; 95% CI 1.00 to 1.21, p = 0.048) was associated with the occurrence of postprocedural stent thrombosis. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to the absence of FKB, the "crush" stenting technique with FKB appears to be associated with more favorable long-term outcomes. When utilizing the "crush" stenting technique, FKB is mandatory.     

Twenty-Four-Month Update on Double-Kissing Crush Stenting of Bifurcation Lesions

A group of 312 patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention for bifurcation lesions at 12 centers in China, Singapore, Thailand, Israel, India, and Japan were enrolled in a prospective, randomized DKCRUSH-1 trial. The goal of the study was to compare the double kissing (DK) crush technique with the classical crush stenting technique. This study was carried out to determine the differences in the rates of final kissing balloon inflations (FKBI) and the long-term clinical outcomes. The 8-month results of the DKCRUSH-1 study have been previously reported. Here, we present several subgroups analysis and a 24-month clinical update. The results confirmed a sustained, lower MACE rate at 24 months with the double kissing (DK) crush stenting technique compared with that for the classical crush stenting technique (18.1% vs. 29.9%, p = 0.044).     

Three-dimensional modeling of double-stent techniques at the left main coronary artery bifurcation using micro-focus X-ray computed tomography.

BACKGROUND: Various double-stent techniques using drug-eluting stents have been proposed to treat the left main coronary artery (LMCA) bifurcation. However, use of these techniques is frequently associated with focal restenosis at the ostium of the left circumflex coronary artery (LCX). OBJECTIVES: To examine the results of double-stent techniques, using a silicon model of the LMCA bifurcation and three-dimensional (3D) reconstruction images created with micro-focus X-ray computed tomography (MFCT). METHODS: Crush, kissing, and modified T stentings were performed with bare metal stents in a LMCA bifurcation model. The stents were then inspected using MFCT at a minimal resolution of 0.06 mm. RESULTS: Gaps in stent apposition to the vessel were observed at the site of stent overlap in the distal LMCA with all stenting techniques. In crush stenting, when the left anterior descending artery stent overlapped the LCX stent, the latter was crushed on the myocardial side of the vessel, and a gap was observed on the nonmyocardial side, at the LCX ostium. When the overlap was reversed, the LCX stent was crushed on the nonmyocardial side and a gap was observed on the myocardial side. In the case of kissing stents, stent overlap created a gap beneath the overlapped portion of the stents. In modified T-stenting, correct positioning of the LCX stent was difficult and MFCT imaging revealed a nonmyocardial gap. CONCLUSIONS: Close apposition of the stent to the vessel at the ostium of the LCX is difficult to achieve at the LMCA bifurcation, regardless of which double-stent technique is employed, due to the site's wide bifurcation angle and complex 3D structure. The distribution of plaque and the bifurcation angle should be considered before double-stent deployment, to avoid leaving a gap over significant plaques.     

Long-term outcomes after stenting of bifurcation lesions with the "crush" technique: predictors of an adverse outcome.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate predictors of an adverse outcome after "crush" bifurcation stenting. BACKGROUND: The "crush" technique is a recently introduced strategy with limited data regarding long-term outcomes. METHODS: We identified 231 consecutive patients treated with drug-eluting stent implantation with the "crush" technique for 241 de novo bifurcation lesions. Clinical follow-up was obtained in 99.6%. RESULTS: The in-hospital major adverse cardiac event (MACE) rate was 5.2%. At 9 months, 10 (4.3%) patients had an event consistent with possible post-procedural stent thrombosis. Survival free of target lesion revascularization (TLR) was 90.3%; the only independent predictor of TLR was left main stem (LMS) therapy (odds ratio [OR] 4.97; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.00 to 12.37, p = 0.001). Survival free of MACE was 83.5% and independent predictors of MACE were LMS therapy (OR 3.79; 95% CI 1.76 to 8.14, p = 0.001) and treatment of patients with multivessel disease (OR 4.21; 95% CI 0.95 to 18.56, p = 0.058). Angiographic follow-up was obtained in 77% of lesions at 8.3 +/- 3.7 months. The mean late loss of the main vessel and side branch were 0.30 +/- 0.64 mm and 0.41 +/- 0.67 mm, respectively, with binary restenosis rates of 9.1% and 25.3%. Kissing balloon post-dilation significantly reduced the side branch late lumen loss (0.24 +/- 0.50 mm vs. 0.58 +/- 0.77 mm, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The crush technique of bifurcation stenting with drug-eluting stents is associated with favorable outcomes for most lesions; however, efficacy appears significantly reduced in LMS bifurcations, and further research is needed before the technique can be routinely recommended in this group. Furthermore, the incidence of possible stent thrombosis is of concern and requires further investigation. Kissing balloon post-dilatation is mandatory to reduce side branch restenosis.     

Angiographic and clinical outcome after crush of everolimus‐eluting stent for distal unprotected left main disease

Obiectives : Angiographic and clinical outcomes after crushing of everolimus‐eluting stent (EES) for distal unprotected left main disease (ULMD). Background : Few data exist about crushing of EES for distal ULMD. Methods : From the Florence ULMD Percutaneous Coronary Interevention Registry consecutive patients with distal ULMD treated with EES were included in the analysis. Patients treated with provisional stenting were compared with patients treated with crush stenting. Endpoints: angiographic in‐segment restenosis rate, and 1‐year clinical outcome. Results : From 2008 to 2015, 405 patients with distal ULMD were treated with EES: 278 (69%) were treated with provisional stenting while 127 (31%) with crush stenting. Provisional stenting group compared to crush stenting group had higher incidence of acute coronary syndrome on admission (63% vs. 52%; P = 0.033) and of left ventricular ejection fraction ≤ 40% (36% vs. 23%; p= 0.008), while patients treated with crush stenting had more frequently diabetes mellitus (35% vs. 21%; P = 0.003) and 3‐vessel coronary artery disease (46% vs. 29%; P < 0.001). Angiographic follow rate was 95%. Restenosis rates were similar: 7.1% in the crush stenting group and 5.8% in the provisional stenting group. There were no differences in 1‐year clinical outcome between crush stenting group and provisional stenting group: major adverse cardiac events 11.1% and 11.2%, stent thrombosis 0.8% and 1.4%, respectively. Conclusion : Crush stenting using EES in patients with complex distal ULMD is associated with low rates of restenosis and adverse clinical events and could be considered as a valid double stenting technique in all patients with complex ULMD bifurcation lesions. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

One-year clinical outcomes of protected and unprotected left main coronary artery stenting.

AIMS: To evaluate outcomes for left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenting and compare results between protected (left coronary grafted) and unprotected LMCA stenting in the current bare-metal stent era. METHODS: We reviewed outcomes among 142 consecutive patients who underwent protected or unprotected LMCA stenting since 1997. All-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), target-lesion revascularization (TLR), and the combined major adverse clinical event (MACE) rates at one year were computed. RESULTS: Ninety-nine patients (70%) underwent protected and 43 patients (30%) underwent unprotected LMCA stenting. In the unprotected group, 86% were considered poor surgical candidates. Survival at one year was 88% for all patients, TLR 20%, and MACE 32%. At one year, survival was reduced in the unprotected group (72% vs. 95%, P<0.001) and MACE was increased in the unprotected patients (49% vs. 25%, P=0.005). CONCLUSIONS: In the current era, stenting for both protected and unprotected LMCA disease is still associated with high long-term mortality and MACE rates. Stenting for unprotected LMCA disease in a high-risk population should only be considered in the absence of other revascularization options. Further studies are needed to evaluate the role of stenting for unprotected LMCA disease.     

双对吻挤压与经典挤压技术治疗冠状动脉分叉病变的前瞻性、随机、多中心研究

目的 比较双对吻挤压(DK crush)和经典挤压技术治疗冠状动脉分叉病变的临床效果.方法 311例真性分叉病变患者随机分入DK crush组(n=155)和经典挤压组(n=156),随访时间8个月.一级及二级终点分别为主要心脏不良事件(MACE,包括心肌梗死、心原性死亡和靶病变血运重建)和血管直径再狭窄及晚期丢失.结果 DK crush组糖尿病患者较多.经典挤压组及DKcrush组最终对吻扩张(FKBI)成功率分别为76%和100%(P＜0.001).DK crush术式的不足包括造影剂用量大(P=0.04)、球囊数量多(P＜0.01)、手术时间长(P＜0.001),但是对吻扩张不满意率显著减少(27.6%比6.3%,P＜0.01).临床随访率为100%,冠状动脉造影随访率为82%.经典挤压组累计再狭窄率为32.3%,而DK crush组为20.3%(P=0.01),经典挤压组分支血管再狭窄率高(24.4%比12.3%,P=0.01),而两组间主干血管再狭窄率差异无统计学意义.经典挤压组术后8个月时的累计MACE发生率为24.4%(FKBI失败组为35.9%,FKBI成功组为19.7%),显著高于DK crush组(11.4%,P=0.02).经典挤压组血栓栓塞率为3.2%(FKBI失败组为5.1%,FKBI成功组为1.7%),而DK crush组为1.3%(P＞0.05).经典挤压组术后8个月时无靶病变血运重建生存率为75.4%(FKBI失败组为71.2%,FKBI成功组为77.6%),而DK crush组为89.5%(P=0.002).结论 DK crush可能是治疗冠状动脉分叉病变的较佳术式.