CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Differences between the left main and other bifurcations Ascending Aortic Length and Risk of Aortic Adverse Events: The Neglected Dimension Decline in Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction During Follow-Up in Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis Infective Endocarditis After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement New-onset atrial fibrillation after PCI and CABG for left main disease: insights from the EXCEL trial and additional studies 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 Surgical ineligibility and mortality among patients with unprotected left main or multivessel coronary artery disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention EXCELling in Left Main Intervention Serial intravascular ultrasound analysis of the main and side branches in bifurcation lesions treated with the T-stenting technique Active SB-P Versus Conventional Approach to the Protection of High-Risk Side Branches: The CIT-RESOLVE Trial
|<<... 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 ...>>|

Original Research2018 Mar 23. doi: 10.1253/circj.CJ-17-0921.

JOURNAL：Circ J. Article Link

Effect of Side Branch Predilation in Coronary Bifurcation Stenting With the Provisional Approach - Results From the COBIS (Coronary Bifurcation Stenting) II Registry

Lee SH, Song YB, Lee JM et al. Keywords: Bifurcation; Percutaneous coronary intervention; Side branch predilation

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND - Whether side branch (SB) predilation before main vessel (MV) stenting is beneficial is uncertain, so we investigated the effects of SB predilation on procedural and long-term outcomes in coronary bifurcation lesions treated using the provisional approach.Methods and Results:A total of 1,083 patients with true bifurcation lesions undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention were evaluated. The primary outcome was a major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE): cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization. SB predilation was performed in 437 (40.4%) patients. Abrupt (10.5% vs. 11.3%; P=0.76) or final SB occlusion (2.7% vs. 3.9%; P=0.41) showed no differences between the predilation and non-predilation groups. The rates of angiographic success (69.1% vs. 52.9%, P<0.001) and SB stent implantation (69.1% vs. 52.9%, P<0.001) were significantly higher in the predilation group. During a median follow-up of 36 months, we found no significant difference between the groups in the rate of MACE (9.4% vs. 11.5%; P=0.67) in a propensity score-matched population. In subgroup analysis, patients with minimal luminal diameter of the parent vessel ≤1 mm benefited from SB predilation in terms of preventing abrupt SB occlusion (P for interaction=0.04).


CONCLUSIONS - For the treatment of true bifurcation lesions, SB predilation improved acute angiographic and procedural outcomes, but could not improve long-term clinical outcomes. It may benefit patients with severe stenosis in the parent vessel.
>CBS CBS 2019

> CBS 2019

> CBS 2019 注册

> CBS 2019 会议日程

> CBS 2019 学术征集

> CBS 2019 热点

 CBSMD

> CBSMD 网站注册

> 教育中心

> 荐读文献

> Top 10 阅读文献

> 文献导读
CBS 2019 CBS 2019 主席团 教育中心 科研动态
Copyright ⓒ CBS MD Nanjing China. All rights reserved. 京ICP备16025898号-11
联系我们| Top