CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

左主干支架

Abstract

Recommended Article

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention vs Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Patients With Left Main Coronary Artery Stenosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Operator Experience and Outcomes After Left Main Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Surgical ineligibility and mortality among patients with unprotected left main or multivessel coronary artery disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention Differential prognostic impact of treatment strategy among patients with left main versus non-left main bifurcation lesions undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: results from the COBIS (Coronary Bifurcation Stenting) Registry II Long-term results after PCI of unprotected distal left main coronary artery stenosis: the Bifurcations Bad Krozingen (BBK)-Left Main Registry Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Patients With Left Main and Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease: Do We Have the Evidence? Two-year outcomes following unprotected left main stenting with first vs new-generation drug-eluting stents: the FINE registry. EuroIntervention. Stroke Rates Following Surgical Versus Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization

Clinical TrialVolume 61, Issue 14, 9 April 2013, Pages 1482-1488

JOURNAL:J Am Coll Cardiol. Article Link

Comparison of double kissing crush versus Culotte stenting for unprotected distal left main bifurcation lesions: results from a multicenter, randomized, prospective DKCRUSH-III study

Chen SL, Xu B, Han YL et al. Keywords: bifurcation lesions; culotte stenting; double kissing crush; major adverse cardiac event; protected left main coronary artery

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES - The study aimed to investigate the difference in major adverse cardiac event (MACE) at 1-year after double kissing (DK) crush versus Culotte stenting for unprotected left main coronary artery (UPLMCA) distal bifurcation lesions.


BACKGROUND - DK crush and Culotte stenting were reported to be effective for treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions. However, their comparative performance in UPLMCA bifurcation lesions is not known.


METHODS - A total of 419 patients with UPLMCA bifurcation lesions were randomly assigned to DK (n = 210) or Culotte (n = 209) treatment. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of a MACE at 1 year, including cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization (TVR). In-stent restenosis (ISR) at 8 months was secondary endpoint, and stent thrombosis (ST) served as a safety endpoint. Patients were stratified by SYNTAX (Synergy between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with Taxus and Cardiac Surgery) and NERS (New Risk Stratification) scores.


RESULTS - Patients in the Culotte group had significant higher 1-year MACE rate (16.3%), mainly driven by increased TVR (11.0%), compared with the DK group (6.2% and 4.3%, respectively; all p < 0.05). ISR rate in side branch was 12.6% in the Culotte group and 6.8% in the DK group (p = 0.037). Definite ST rate was 1.0% in the Culotte group and 0% in the DK group (p = 0.248). Among patients with bifurcation angle ≥70°, NERS score ≥20, and SYNTAX score ≥23, the 1-year MACE rate in the DK group (3.8%, 9.2%, and 7.1%, respectively) was significantly different to those in the Culotte group(16.5%, 20.4%, and 18.9%, respectively; all p < 0.05).


CONCLUSIONS - Culotte stenting for UPLMCA bifurcation lesions was associated with significantly increased MACEs, mainly due to the increased TVR. (Double Kissing [DK] Crush Versus Culotte Stenting for the Treatment of Unprotected Distal Left Main Bifurcation Lesions: DKCRUSH-III, a Multicenter Randomized Study Comparing Double-Stent Techniques; ChiCTR-TRC-00000151).