Comparing Two-Stent Strategies for Bifurcation Coronary Lesions: Which Vessel Should be Stented First, the Main Vessel or the Side Branch?

This study compared two-stent strategies for treatment of bifurcation lesions by stenting order, 'main across side first (A-family)' vs 'side branch first (S-family). The study population was patients from 16 centers in Korea who underwent drug eluting stent implantation with two-stent strategy (A-family:109, S-family:140 patients). The endpoints were cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), stent thrombosis (ST), and target lesion revascularization (TLR) during 3 years. During 440.8 person-years (median 20.2 months), there was 1 cardiac death, 4 MIs (including 2 STs), and 12 TLRs. Cumulative incidence of cardiac death, MI and ST was lower in A-family (0% in A-family vs 4.9% in S-family, P = 0.045). However, TLR rates were not different between the two groups (7.1% vs 6.2%, P = 0.682). Final kissing inflation (FKI) was a predictor of the hard-endpoint (hazard ratio 0.061; 95% CI 0.007-0.547, P = 0.013), but was not a predictor of TLR. The incidence of hard-endpoint of S-family with FKI was comparable to A-family, whereas S-family without FKI showed the poorest prognosis (1.1% vs 15.9%, retrospectively; P = 0.011). In conclusion, 'A-family' seems preferable to 'S-family' if both approaches are feasible. When two-stent strategy is used, every effort should be made to perform FKI, especially in 'S-family'.

[1]  S. de Servi,et al.  Real-world outcome of coronary bifurcation lesions in the drug-eluting stent era: results from the 4,314-patient Italian Society of Invasive Cardiology (SICI-GISE) Italian Multicenter Registry on Bifurcations (I-BIGIS). , 2010, American heart journal.

[2]  M. Jeong,et al.  Sirolimus- versus paclitaxel-eluting stents for the treatment of coronary bifurcations results: from the COBIS (Coronary Bifurcation Stenting) Registry. , 2010, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[3]  D. Hildick-Smith,et al.  Percutaneous coronary intervention for bifurcation lesions: 2008 consensus document from the fourth meeting of the European Bifurcation Club. , 2009, EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology.

[4]  M. Niemelä,et al.  Randomized Comparison of Coronary Bifurcation Stenting With the Crush Versus the Culotte Technique Using Sirolimus Eluting Stents: The Nordic Stent Technique Study , 2009, Circulation. Cardiovascular interventions.

[5]  E. Bramucci,et al.  Randomized Study of the Crush Technique Versus Provisional Side-Branch Stenting in True Coronary Bifurcations: The CACTUS (Coronary Bifurcations: Application of the Crushing Technique Using Sirolimus-Eluting Stents) Study , 2009, Circulation.

[6]  R. Gil,et al.  Clinical verification of a theory for predicting side branch stenosis after main vessel stenting in coronary bifurcation lesions. , 2008, Journal of interventional cardiology.

[7]  A. Kastrati,et al.  Culotte stenting technique in coronary bifurcation disease: angiographic follow-up using dedicated quantitative coronary angiographic analysis and 12-month clinical outcomes. , 2008, European heart journal.

[8]  F. Neumann,et al.  Randomized trial on routine vs. provisional T-stenting in the treatment of de novo coronary bifurcation lesions , 2008, European heart journal.

[9]  A. Colombo,et al.  Bifurcation stenting: current strategies and new devices , 2008, Heart.

[10]  Yuejin Yang,et al.  Comparative Study of Simple Versus Complex Stenting of Coronary Artery Bifurcation Lesions in Daily Practice in Chinese Patients , 2008, Clinical cardiology.

[11]  F. Ye,et al.  Study comparing the double kissing (DK) crush with classical crush for the treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions: the DKCRUSH-1 Bifurcation Study with drug-eluting stents , 2008, European journal of clinical investigation.

[12]  Ben He,et al.  Final kissing balloon inflation by classic crush stenting did not improve the clinical outcomes for the treatment of unprotected left main bifurcation lesions: The importance of double‐kissing crush technique , 2008, Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions.

[13]  Vladimir Dzavik,et al.  Classification of coronary artery bifurcation lesions and treatments: Time for a consensus! , 2008, Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions.

[14]  Kevin J. Anstrom,et al.  Using Inverse Probability-Weighted Estimators in Comparative Effectiveness Analyses With Observational Databases , 2007, Medical care.

[15]  P. Serruys,et al.  Clinical End Points in Coronary Stent Trials: A Case for Standardized Definitions , 2007, Circulation.

[16]  Antonio Colombo,et al.  The clinical outcome of percutaneous treatment of bifurcation lesions in multivessel coronary artery disease with the sirolimus-eluting stent: insights from the Arterial Revascularization Therapies Study part II (ARTS II). , 2007, European heart journal.

[17]  H. Bøtker,et al.  Comparison of sirolimus-eluting and bare metal stents in coronary bifurcation lesions: subgroup analysis of the Stenting Coronary Arteries in Non-Stress/Benestent Disease Trial (SCANDSTENT). , 2006, American heart journal.

[18]  M. Niemelä,et al.  Randomized Study on Simple Versus Complex Stenting of Coronary Artery Bifurcation Lesions: The Nordic Bifurcation Study , 2006, Circulation.

[19]  Vladimir Dzavik,et al.  Predictors of long-term outcome after crush stenting of coronary bifurcation lesions: importance of the bifurcation angle. , 2006, American heart journal.

[20]  P. D. de Feyter,et al.  Clinical ResearchInterventional CardiologyLong-Term Outcomes After Stenting of Bifurcation Lesions With the “Crush” Technique: Predictors of an Adverse Outcome , 2006 .

[21]  J. Robins,et al.  Results of multivariable logistic regression, propensity matching, propensity adjustment, and propensity-based weighting under conditions of nonuniform effect. , 2006, American journal of epidemiology.

[22]  J. Suárez de Lezo,et al.  [A new classification of coronary bifurcation lesions]. , 2006, Revista espanola de cardiologia.

[23]  Alfonso Medina,et al.  Una clasificación simple de las lesiones coronarias en bifurcación , 2006 .

[24]  I. Iakovou,et al.  Clinical and angiographic outcome after implantation of drug-eluting stents in bifurcation lesions with the crush stent technique: importance of final kissing balloon post-dilation. , 2005, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[25]  Patrick W Serruys,et al.  Five-year outcomes after coronary stenting versus bypass surgery for the treatment of multivessel disease: the final analysis of the Arterial Revascularization Therapies Study (ARTS) randomized trial. , 2005, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[26]  I. Iakovou,et al.  In-hospital and nine-month outcome of treatment of coronary bifurcational lesions with sirolimus-eluting stent. , 2005, The American journal of cardiology.

[27]  M. Pan,et al.  Rapamycin-eluting stents for the treatment of bifurcated coronary lesions: a randomized comparison of a simple versus complex strategy. , 2004, American heart journal.

[28]  Stephen R Cole,et al.  Adjusted survival curves with inverse probability weights , 2004, Comput. Methods Programs Biomed..

[29]  Antonio Colombo,et al.  Randomized Study to Evaluate Sirolimus-Eluting Stents Implanted at Coronary Bifurcation Lesions , 2004, Circulation.

[30]  J. Coresh,et al.  Adjusting survival curves for confounders: a review and a new method. , 1996, American journal of epidemiology.