CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Routinely reported ejection fraction and mortality in clinical practice: where does the nadir of risk lie? Routine Continuous Electrocardiographic Monitoring Following Percutaneous Coronary Interventions Microthrombi As A Major Cause of Cardiac Injury in COVID-19: A Pathologic Study Association between urinary dickkopf-3, acute kidney injury, and subsequent loss of kidney function in patients undergoing cardiac surgery: an observational cohort study ACCF/SCAI/STS/AATS/AHA/ASNC 2009 Appropriateness Criteria for Coronary Revascularization: A Report by the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriateness Criteria Task Force, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Thoracic Surgeons, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American Heart Association, and the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology Endorsed by the American Society of Echocardiography, the Heart Failure Society of America, and the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography Treatment of higher-risk patients with an indication for revascularization: evolution within the field of contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention 中国肺高血压诊断和治疗指南2018 Dabigatran dual therapy with ticagrelor or clopidogrel after percutaneous coronary intervention in atrial fibrillation patients with or without acute coronary syndrome: a subgroup analysis from the RE-DUAL PCI trial 2019 AHA/ACC/HRS Focused Update of the 2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines and the Heart Rhythm Society A randomized multicentre trial to compare revascularization with optimal medical therapy for the treatment of chronic total coronary occlusions

Original Research2012 Jul-Aug;13(4):228-33.

JOURNAL:Cardiovasc Revasc Med. Article Link

Classification and treatment of coronary artery bifurcation lesions: putting the Medina classification to the test

Zlotnick DM, Ramanath VS, Brown JR et al. Keywords: Medina classification, bifurcation lesion; treatment strategy

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND - Coronary bifurcation lesions are common, difficult to treat, and associated with poorer outcomes compared to non-bifurcation lesions. The Medina classification has been widely adopted as the preferred system to classify bifurcation lesions, however there have been little efforts to characterize this metric. The objective of this study was to characterize the inter-observer variability of the Medina classification and examine its contribution to treatment selection strategy.

 

METHODS AND MATERIALS - We invited 150 interventional cardiologists from the United States and Europe to complete an online survey evaluating 12 freeze frame coronary angiograms of bifurcation lesions. Each respondent was asked to characterize the bifurcation lesions using the Medina classification and other metrics including side branch vessel size and angle. Respondents were asked to designate either a provisional (1 stent) or dedicated (2 stent) treatment strategy. 'Complex' lesions were defined as Medina scores 1.1.1, 0.1.1, or 1.0.1.

 

RESULTS - A total of 49 interventional cardiologists responded. In 7 of the 12 angiograms evaluated, there was >75% agreement regarding lesion classification using the Medina system. There was moderate inter-observer agreement when using Medina to classify lesions as 'Complex' vs. 'non-Complex'. 'Complex' bifurcation designation and side branch size were predictive of selection of a dedicated treatment strategy, whereas side branch angle was not.

 

CONCLUSIONS - The Medina classification is a useful tool in characterizing coronary bifurcation lesions. For the majority of the angiograms evaluated there was good inter-observer agreement in lesion classification using the Medina system. 'Complex' bifurcation designation and side branch size were predictive of selection of a dedicated treatment strategy.

 

Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.