CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

The (R)Evolution of the CICU - Better for the Patient, Better for Education Hospital Readmission After Perioperative Acute Myocardial Infarction Associated With Noncardiac Surgery Canadian SCAD Cohort Study: Shedding Light on SCAD From a United Front Selection of stenting approach for coronary bifurcation lesions Decreased inspired oxygen stimulates de novo formation of coronary collaterals in adult heart Update in the Percutaneous Management of Coronary Chronic Total Occlusions BMI, Infarct Size, and Clinical Outcomes Following Primary PCI Patient-Level Analysis From 6 Randomized Trials Clinical Practice Guideline for Screening and Management of High Blood Pressure in Children and Adolescents Association of the PHACTR1/EDN1 Genetic Locus With Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection Reappraisal of Reported Genes for Sudden Arrhythmic Death: An Evidence-Based Evaluation of Gene Validity for Brugada Syndrome

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.