CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Criteria for Iron Deficiency in Patients With Heart Failure Five-Year Outcomes of Transcatheter or Surgical Aortic-Valve Replacement 2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines Comparison of 1-Year Pre- And Post-Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Hospitalization Rates: A Population-Based Cohort Study High-Risk Coronary Plaque Regression After Intensive Lifestyle Intervention in Nonbstructive Coronary Disease: A Randomized Study Ticagrelor Monotherapy Versus Dual-Antiplatelet Therapy After PCI: An Individual Patient-Level Meta-Analysis Clinical Phenogroups in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction: Detailed Phenotypes, Prognosis, and Response to Spironolactone Proteomics to Improve Phenotyping in Obese Patients with Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction Osteoarthritis risk is reduced after treatment with ticagrelor compared to clopidogrel: a propensity score matching analysis Coronary Access After TAVR With a Self-Expanding Bioprosthesis: Insights From Computed Tomography

Clinical Trial2014 Mar;7(3):255-63.

JOURNAL:JACC Cardiovasc Interv. Article Link

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

Song YB, Hahn JY, Gwon HC et al. Keywords: angioplasty; bifurcation lesions; drug-eluting stent(s); left main

ABSTRACT


OBJECTIVES - The authors sought to investigate whether the impact of treatment strategies on clinical outcomes differed between patients with left main (LM) bifurcation lesions and those with non-LM bifurcation lesions.


BACKGROUND - Few studies have considered anatomic location when comparing 1- and 2-stent strategies for bifurcation lesions.

METHODS - We compared the prognostic impact of treatment strategies on clinical outcomes in 2,044 patients with non-LM bifurcation lesions and 853 with LM bifurcation lesions. The primary outcome was target lesion failure (TLF) defined as a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), and target lesion revascularization.

RESULTS - The 2-stent strategy was used more frequently in the LM bifurcation group than in the non-LM bifurcation group (40.3% vs. 20.8%, p < 0.01). During a median follow-up of 36 months, the 2-stent strategy was not associated with a higher incidence of cardiac death (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.24; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.72 to 2.14; p = 0.44), cardiac death or MI (HR: 1.12; 95% CI: 0.58 to 2.19; p = 0.73), or TLF (HR: 1.39; 95% CI: 0.99 to 1.94; p = 0.06) in the non-LM bifurcation group. In contrast, in patients with LM bifurcation lesions, the 2-stent strategy was associated with a higher incidence of cardiac death (HR: 2.43; 95% CI: 1.05 to 5.59; p = 0.04), cardiac death or MI (HR: 2.09; 95% CI: 1.08 to 4.04; p = 0.03), as well as TLF (HR: 2.38; 95% CI: 1.60 to 3.55; p < 0.01). Significant interactions were present between treatment strategies and bifurcation lesion locations for TLF (p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS - The 1-stent strategy, if possible, should initially be considered the preferred approach for the treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions, especially LM bifurcation lesions. (Korean Coronary Bifurcation Stenting [COBIS] Registry II; NCT01642992).

Copyright © 2014 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.