CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Stenting Left Main

Abstract

Recommended Article

Impact of SYNTAX Score on 10-Year Outcomes After Revascularization for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease Optimizing outcomes during left main percutaneous coronary intervention with intravascular ultrasound and fractional flow reserve: the current state of evidence Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with three-vessel or left main coronary artery disease: 10-year follow-up of the multicentre randomised controlled SYNTAX trial Contemporary Use and Trends in Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the United States: An Analysis of the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Research to Practice Initiative Comparative effectiveness analysis of percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with chronic kidney disease and unprotected left main coronary artery disease Intravascular Imaging and 12-Month Mortality After Unprotected Left Main Stem PCI: An Analysis From the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society Database Revascularization in Patients With Left Main Coronary Artery Disease and Left Ventricular Dysfunction Differences between the left main and other bifurcations

Clinical Trial2017 Oct 4. [Epub ahead of print]

JOURNAL:Int J Cardiol. Article Link

Provisional versus elective two-stent strategy for unprotected true left main bifurcation lesions: Insights from a FAILS-2 sub-study

Kawamoto H, Chieffo A, Colombo A et al. Keywords: Drug-eluting stent; Percutaneous coronary intervention; True bifurcation lesions; Unprotected left main coronary artery

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND - This study sought to investigate the optimal percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) strategy for true unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) bifurcations.


METHODS - The FAILS-2 was a retrospective multi-center study including patients with ULMCA disease treated with second-generation drug-eluting stents. Of these, we compared clinical outcomes of a provisional strategy (PS; n=216) versus an elective two-stent strategy (E2S; n=161) for true ULMCA bifurcations. The primary endpoint was the incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) at 3-years. We further performed propensity-score adjustment for clinical outcomes.


RESULTS - There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of patient and lesion characteristics. 9.7% of patients in the PS group crossed over to a provisional two-stent strategy. MACEs were not significantly different between groups (MACE at 3-year; PS 28.1% vs. E2S 28.9%, adjusted p=0.99). The rates of target lesion revascularization (TLR) on the circumflex artery (LCX) were numerically high in the E2S group (LCX-TLR at 3-years; PS 11.8% vs. E2S 16.6%, adjusted p=0.51).


CONCLUSIONS - E2S was associated with a comparable MACE rate to PS for true ULMCA bifurcations. The rates of LCX-TLR tended to be higher in the E2S group although there was no statistical significance.


CONDENSED ABSTRACT - This study sought to compare the clinical outcomes of a provisional strategy (PS) with an elective two-stent strategy (E2S) for the treatment of true unprotected left main coronary artery bifurcations. 377 Patients (PS 216 vs. E2S 161 patients) were evaluated, and 9.7% in the PS group crossed over to a two-stent strategy. E2S was associated with a similar major adverse cardiac event rate at 3-years when compared to the PS strategy (PS 28.1% vs. E2S 28.9%, p=0.99). However, the left circumflex artery TLR rate at 3-year tended to be higher in the E2S group (PS 11.8% vs. E2S 16.6%, p=0.51).