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 >>|

Original Research26 June 2020

JOURNAL：Eur Heart J. Article Link

Multicentre, randomized comparison of two-stent and provisional stenting techniques in patients with complex coronary bifurcation lesions: the DEFINITION II trial

JJ Zhang, F Ye, Kai Xu et al. Keywords: coronary bifurcation lesions; two-stent technique vs. provisional stenting; two-stent strategy; target lesion failure; stent thrombosis

ABSTRACT

AIM - The present study aimed to assess the benefits of two-stent techniques for patients with DEFINITION criteria-defined complex coronary bifurcation lesions.

METHODS AND RESULTS - In total, 653 patients with complex bifurcation lesions at 49 international centres were randomly assigned to undergo the systematic two-stent technique (two-stent group) or provisional stenting (provisional group). The primary endpoint was the composite of target lesion failure (TLF) at the 1-year follow-up, including cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction (TVMI), and clinically driven target lesion revascularization (TLR). The safety endpoint was definite or probable stent thrombosis. At the 1-year follow-up, TLF occurred in 37 (11.4%) and 20 (6.1%) patients in the provisional and two-stent groups, respectively [77.8%: double-kissing crush; hazard ratio (HR) 0.52, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.30–0.90; P = 0.019], largely driven by increased TVMI (7.1%, HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.20–0.90; P = 0.025) and clinically driven TLR (5.5%, HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.19–1.00; P = 0.049) in the provisional group. At the 1 year after indexed procedures, the incidence of cardiac death was 2.5% in the provisional group, non-significant to 2.1% in the two-stent group (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.31–2.37; P = 0.772).

CONCLUSION - For DEFINITION criteria-defined complex coronary bifurcation lesions, the systematic two-stent approach was associated with a significant improvement in clinical outcomes compared with the provisional stenting approach. Further study is urgently warranted to identify the mechanisms contributing to the increased rate of TVMI after provisional stenting.

STUDY REGISTRATION - http://www.clinicaltrials.com; Identifier: NCT02284750.

>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