CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Determinants and Impact of Heart Failure Readmission Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement The sinus venosus contributes to coronary vasculature through VEGFC-stimulated angiogenesis New-onset atrial fibrillation after PCI and CABG for left main disease: insights from the EXCEL trial and additional studies Impact of Incomplete Coronary Revascularization on Late Ischemic and Bleeding Events after Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement 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 2019 Guidelines on Diabetes, Pre-Diabetes and Cardiovascular Diseases developed in collaboration with the EASD ESC Clinical Practice Guidelines Associations between Blood Lead Levels and Coronary Artery Stenosis Measured Using Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography Left Main Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Patients With Prior Cerebrovascular Disease: Results From the EXCEL Trial Frailty in Older Adults Undergoing Aortic Valve Replacement: The FRAILTY-AVR Study Adenosine and adenosine receptor-mediated action in coronary microcirculation

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.