CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

分叉支架

Abstract

Recommended Article

Active SB-P Versus Conventional Approach to the Protection of High-Risk Side Branches: The CIT-RESOLVE Trial Validation of bifurcation DEFINITION criteria and comparison of stenting strategies in true left main bifurcation lesions Classification and treatment of coronary artery bifurcation lesions: putting the Medina classification to the test Randomized study on simple versus complex stenting of coronary artery bifurcation lesions: the Nordic bifurcation study ‘Small bifurcation?’ CT myocardial mass volume measurements change therapeutic strategy in coronary artery disease One Versus 2-stent Strategy for the Treatment of Bifurcation Lesions in the Context of a Coronary Chronic Total Occlusion: A Multicenter Registry T and small protrusion (TAP) vs double kissing crush technique: Insights from in-vitro models Percutaneous Coronary Intervention For Bifurcation Coronary Lesions.The 15th Consensus Document from the European Bifurcation Club

Original Research2019 Nov 12. pii: EIJ-D-19-00534.

JOURNAL:EuroIntervention. Article Link

Anatomical Attributes of Clinically Relevant Diagonal Branches in Patients with Left Anterior Descending Coronary Artery Bifurcation Lesions

Jeon WK, Park J, Koo BK et al. Keywords: left anterior descending coronary artery bifurcation lesions; clinical relevance; prediction models

ABSTRACT


AIMS - This study aimed to investigate the anatomical attributes determining myocardial territory of diagonal branches and to develop prediction models for clinically relevant branches using myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) and coronary CT angiography (CCTA).


METHODS AND RESULTS - The amount of ischemia and subtended myocardial mass of diagonal branches were quantified using MPI by percent ischemic myocardium (%ischemia) and CCTA by percent fractional myocardial mass (%FMM), respectively. In 49 patients with isolated diagonal branch disease, the mean %ischemia by MPI was 6.8±4.0% whereas in patients with total occlusion or severe disease of all diagonal branches, it was 8.4±3.3%. %ischemia was different according to the presence of non-diseased diagonal branches and dominant left circumflex artery (LCx). In CCTA cohort (306 patients, 564 diagonal branches), mean %FMM was 5.9±4.4% and 86 branches (15.2%) had %FMM 10%. %FMM was different according to LCx dominance, number of branches, vessel size, and relative dominance between 2 diagonal branches. The diagnostic accuracies of prediction models for %FMM 10% based on logistic regression and decision tree were 0.92 (95% CI 0.85-0.96) and 0.91 (95% CI 0.84-0.96), respectively. There was no difference in the diagnostic performance of models with and without size criterion.


CONCLUSIONS - LCx dominance, number of branches, vessel size, and dominance among diagonal branches determined the myocardial territory of diagonal branches. Clinical application of prediction models based on these anatomical attributes can help determine the clinically relevant diagonal branches in the cardiac catheterization laboratory.