CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Bifurcation Stenting

Abstract

Recommended Article

The European bifurcation club Left Main Coronary Stent study: a randomized comparison of stepwise provisional vs. systematic dual stenting strategies (EBC MAIN) ‘Small bifurcation?’ CT myocardial mass volume measurements change therapeutic strategy in coronary artery disease T and small protrusion (TAP) vs double kissing crush technique: Insights from in-vitro models Incidence of Adverse Events at 3 Months Versus at 12 Months After Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Cessation in Patients Treated With Thin Stents With Unprotected Left Main or Coronary Bifurcations Effect of Side Branch Predilation in Coronary Bifurcation Stenting With the Provisional Approach - Results From the COBIS (Coronary Bifurcation Stenting) II Registry Double-Kissing Culotte Technique for Coronary Bifurcation Stenting - Technical evaluation and comparison with conventional double stenting techniques In vitro flow and optical coherence tomography comparison of two bailout techniques after failed provisional stenting for bifurcation percutaneous coronary interventions Effect of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol on the geometry of coronary bifurcation lesions and clinical outcomes of coronary interventions in the J-REVERSE registry
|<< 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >>|

Clinical Trial2008 Dec;1(3):185-92.

JOURNAL：Circ Cardiovasc Interv. Article Link

Impact of bifurcation technique on 2-year clinical outcomes in 773 patients with distal unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis treated with drug-eluting stents

Palmerini T, Marzocchi A, Tamburino C et al.

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND - Distal unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) stenosis represents a technical challenge for interventional cardiologists. In this study, we compared 2-year clinical outcomes of different stenting strategies in patients with distal ULMCA stenosis treated with drug-eluting stents.


METHODS AND RESULTS - The survey promoted by the Italian Society of Invasive Cardiology on ULMCA stenosis was an observational study on patients with ULMCA stenosis treated with percutaneous coronary intervention. In this study, we selected patients with distal ULMCA stenosis treated with drug-eluting stents. Seven hundred seventy-three patients were eligible for this study: 456 were treated with 1 stent (group 1) and 317 with 2 stents (group 2). The primary end point of the study was the incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), defined as the occurrence of mortality, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization. During a 2-year follow-up, risk-adjusted survival free from MACE was significantly higher in patients in group 1 than in patients in group 2. The propensity-adjusted hazard ratio for the risk of 2-year MACE in patients in group 1 versus group 2 was 0.53 (95% CI, 0.37 to 0.76). The propensity-adjusted hazard ratio for the risk of 2-year cardiac mortality and myocardial infarction in patients in group 1 versus group 2 was 0.38 (95% CI, 0.17 to 0.85).

CONCLUSIONS - Compared with the 2-stent technique, the 1-stent technique is associated with a better 2-year MACE-free survival. The stenting strategy is a prognostic factor that should be taken into account when deciding the optimal revascularization treatment.
>CBS CBS 2019

> CBS 2019 REGISTRATION

> CBS 2019 PROGRAM

> CBS 2019 CALL FOR SCIENCE

> CBS 2019 SPOTLIGHTS

 CBSMD

> CBSMD WEBSITE REGISTRATION

> EDUCATION CENTER

> RECOMMANDED PAPER

> TOP 10 RESEARCH PAPER

> PRE-READING

CBS 2019 CBS 2019 FACULTY Education Resource CBSMD Scientific Library
Copyright ⓒ CBS MD Nanjing China. All rights reserved. 京ICP备16025898号-11
联系我们| Top