CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Non-cardiac surgery in patients with coronary artery disease: risk evaluation and periprocedural management Burden of 30-Day Readmissions After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in 833,344 Patients in the United States: Predictors, Causes, and Cost Non-invasive detection of coronary inflammation using computed tomography and prediction of residual cardiovascular risk (the CRISP CT study): a post-hoc analysis of prospective outcome data Incidence of contrast-induced acute kidney injury in a large cohort of all-comers undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: Comparison of five contrast media Step-by-step manual for planning and performing bifurcation PCI: a resource-tailored approach Cardiac MRI Endpoints in Myocardial Infarction Experimental and Clinical Trials JACC Scientific Expert Panel Variation in Revascularization Practice and Outcomes in Asymptomatic Stable Ischemic Heart Disease Defining High Bleeding Risk in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Consensus Document From the Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk Frequency, Regional Variation, and Predictors of Undetermined Cause of Death in Cardiometabolic Clinical Trials: A Pooled Analysis of 9259 Deaths in 9 Trials Society of cardiac angiography and interventions: suggested management of the no-reflow phenomenon in the cardiac catheterization laboratory

Clinical Trial2018 Jul 26. [Epub ahead of print]

JOURNAL:Clin Res Cardiol. Article Link

Long-term results after PCI of unprotected distal left main coronary artery stenosis: the Bifurcations Bad Krozingen (BBK)-Left Main Registry

Ferenc M, Banholzer N, Hochholzer W et al. Keywords: Bifurcation; Distal left main stenosis; Drug-eluting stents; Reintervention; Restenosis; TAP stenting

ABSTRACT


AIMS - Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of unprotected distal left main stenosis (UDLM) is increasingly performed as an alternative to surgical treatment. The optimal strategy for stenting in this setting is still a matter of debate. Therefore, this analysis investigated the long-term clinical outcome of a single- versus a double-stenting strategy for treatment of UDLM.


METHODS AND RESULTS - From a large registry, 867 consecutive patients with UDLM undergoing either single or double stenting with drug-eluting stents (DES) were identified. Follow-up was up to 10 (median 3.1, interquartile range 1.1-5.3) years. Primary endpoint was MACE consisting of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or target lesion re-intervention (TLR). Secondary clinical endpoints included these single endpoints and stent thrombosis. MACE occurred in 41.5% after single and in 49.0% after double stenting (P = 0.03). TLR was lower after single (17.4%) as compared to double stenting (27.2%; P < 0.01). Between single and double stenting, there were no significant differences for death (26.4 versus 23.3%; P = 0.31), death or myocardial infarction (29.1 versus 27.2%; P = 0.55), or definite/probable stent thrombosis (1.3 versus 2.1%; P = 0.42).

CONCLUSIONS - Compared with single stenting, double stenting was associated with a significantly higher long-term risk of MACE. This was driven by a higher incidence of TLR, whereas the risk of death, MI, or stent thrombosis was similar between the two strategies.