CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

Bifurcation Stenting

科研文章

荐读文献

T and small protrusion (TAP) vs double kissing crush technique: Insights from in-vitro models Treating Bifurcation Lesions: The Result Overcomes the Technique 3-Year Outcomes After 2-Stent With Provisional Stenting for Complex Bifurcation Lesions Defined by DEFINITION Criteria The European bifurcation club Left Main Coronary Stent study: a randomized comparison of stepwise provisional vs. systematic dual stenting strategies (EBC MAIN) A Randomized Trial Evaluating Online 3-Dimensional Optical Frequency Domain Imaging-Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Bifurcation Lesions Impact of stent deformity induced by the kissing balloon technique for bifurcating lesions on in-stent restenosis after coronary intervention Selection of stenting approach for coronary bifurcation lesions Systematic Review and Network Meta‐Analysis Comparing Bifurcation Techniques for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Difference in basic concept of coronary bifurcation intervention between Korea and Japan. Insight from questionnaire in experts of Korean and Japanese bifurcation clubs 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

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) 0.300.90; P = 0.019], largely driven by increased TVMI (7.1%, HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.200.90; P = 0.025) and clinically driven TLR (5.5%, HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.191.00; 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 0.312.37; 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.