CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

急性冠脉综合征

Abstract

Recommended Article

Imaging Coronary Anatomy and Reducing Myocardial Infarction Cardiac Troponin Composition Characterization after Non ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Relation with Culprit Artery, Ischemic Time Window, and Severity of Injury The year in cardiovascular medicine 2020: acute coronary syndromes and intensive cardiac care Comparison in prevalence, predictors, and clinical outcome of VSR versus FWR after acute myocardial infarction: The prospective, multicenter registry MOODY trial-heart rupture analysis High-sensitivity troponin in the evaluation of patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome: a stepped-wedge, cluster-randomised controlled trial Effect of a Restrictive vs Liberal Blood Transfusion Strategy on Major Cardiovascular Events Among Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction and Anemia: The REALITY Randomized Clinical Trial Relations between implementation of new treatments and improved outcomes in patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction during the last 20 years: experiences from SWEDEHEART registry 1995 to 2014 The Potential Use of the Index of Microcirculatory Resistance to Guide Stratification of Patients for Adjunctive Therapy in Acute Myocardial Infarction

Original Research2018 Mar 23. doi: 10.1253/circj.CJ-17-0921.

JOURNAL:Circ J. Article Link

Effect of Side Branch Predilation in Coronary Bifurcation Stenting With the Provisional Approach - Results From the COBIS (Coronary Bifurcation Stenting) II Registry

Lee SH, Song YB, Lee JM et al. Keywords: Bifurcation; Percutaneous coronary intervention; Side branch predilation

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND - Whether side branch (SB) predilation before main vessel (MV) stenting is beneficial is uncertain, so we investigated the effects of SB predilation on procedural and long-term outcomes in coronary bifurcation lesions treated using the provisional approach.Methods and Results:A total of 1,083 patients with true bifurcation lesions undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention were evaluated. The primary outcome was a major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE): cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization. SB predilation was performed in 437 (40.4%) patients. Abrupt (10.5% vs. 11.3%; P=0.76) or final SB occlusion (2.7% vs. 3.9%; P=0.41) showed no differences between the predilation and non-predilation groups. The rates of angiographic success (69.1% vs. 52.9%, P<0.001) and SB stent implantation (69.1% vs. 52.9%, P<0.001) were significantly higher in the predilation group. During a median follow-up of 36 months, we found no significant difference between the groups in the rate of MACE (9.4% vs. 11.5%; P=0.67) in a propensity score-matched population. In subgroup analysis, patients with minimal luminal diameter of the parent vessel ≤1 mm benefited from SB predilation in terms of preventing abrupt SB occlusion (P for interaction=0.04).


CONCLUSIONS - For the treatment of true bifurcation lesions, SB predilation improved acute angiographic and procedural outcomes, but could not improve long-term clinical outcomes. It may benefit patients with severe stenosis in the parent vessel.