CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

Bifurcation Stenting

科研文章

荐读文献

Double-Kiss-Crush Bifurcation Stenting: Step-by-Step Troubleshooting Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Techniques for Bifurcation Disease: Network Meta-analysis Reveals Superiority of Double-Kissing Crush Multicentre, randomized comparison of two-stent and provisional stenting techniques in patients with complex coronary bifurcation lesions: the DEFINITION II trial Usefulness of longitudinal reconstructed optical coherence tomography images for predicting the need for the reverse wire technique during coronary bifurcation interventions Randomized study to evaluate sirolimus-eluting stents implanted at coronary bifurcation lesions Active SB-P Versus Conventional Approach to the Protection of High-Risk Side Branches: The CIT-RESOLVE Trial Percutaneous coronary intervention for coronary bifurcation disease: 11th consensus document from the European Bifurcation Club Definitions and classifications of bifurcation lesions and treatment

Clinical Trial2015 Dec;11(8):856-9.

JOURNAL:EuroIntervention. Article Link

Long-term outcomes of routine versus provisional T-stenting for de novo coronary bifurcation lesions: five-year results of the Bifurcations Bad Krozingen I study

Ferenc M, Ayoub M, Büttner HJ et al. Keywords: bifurcation stenting; routine T-stenting; provisional T-stenting; outcome

ABSTRACT


AIMS - Previously, we reported that the nine-month angiographic result after treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions with provisional T-stenting was not significantly different from that with routine T-stenting. To compare long-term clinical outcomes of the two stenting strategies, we extended the follow-up of our study on bifurcation stenting.

 

METHODS AND RESULTS - One hundred and one patients with coronary bifurcation lesions had been randomly assigned to provisional T-stenting and 101 to routine T-stenting, using sirolimus-eluting stents. We performed complete five-year follow-up. The primary efficacy endpoint was the incidence of target lesion revascularisation (TLR), and the primary safety endpoint was the incidence of definite/probable stent thrombosis (ST). We also monitored death, myocardial infarction (MI) and MACE (composite of death, MI and TLR). The cumulative five-year incidence of TLR in the provisional T-stenting arm was not significantly different from that in the routine T-stenting arm (16.2% vs. 16.3%, p=0.97). The same was true for MACE (22.8% vs. 22.9%, p=0.91), the composite of death and MI (9.9% vs. 13.9%, p=0.40), and ST (2.0% vs. 5.1%; p=0.25).

 

CONCLUSIONS - During five-year follow-up, routine T-stenting offered no advantage over provisional T-stenting with respect to TLR or MACE. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00288535