Estrategia óptima para el tratamiento de lesiones en bifurcación del tronco coronario izquierdo

Translated title of the contribution: Optimal strategy for side branch treatment in patients with left main coronary bifurcation lesions

Jihoon Kim, Joo Myung Lee, Taek Kyu Park, Jeong Hoon Yang, Joo Yong Hahn, Jin Ho Choi, Seung Hyuk Choi, Ki Bae Seung, Seung Ho Hur, Seung Woon Rha, June Hong Kim, Rak Kyeong Choi, Ju Hyeon Oh, Hyo Soo Kim, Seung Hwan Lee, Jong Seon Park, Sung Yun Lee, Dong Woon Jeon, Myung Ho Jeong, Jae Hwan LeeSang Yeub Lee, Woo Jung Park, Young Bin Song, Hyeon Cheol Gwon

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Introduction and objectives: There are no guidelines regarding the most appropriate approach for provisional side branch (SB) intervention in left main (LM) bifurcation lesions. Methods: The present prospective, randomized, open-label, multicenter trial compared conservative vs aggressive strategies for provisional SB intervention during LM bifurcation treatment. Although the trial was designed to enroll 700 patients, it was prematurely terminated due to slow enrollment. For 160 non-true bifurcation lesions, a 1-stent technique without kissing balloon inflation was applied in the conservative strategy, whereas a 1-stent technique with mandatory kissing balloon inflation was applied in the aggressive strategy. For 46 true bifurcation lesions, a stepwise approach was applied in the conservative strategy (after main vessel stenting, SB ballooning when residual stenosis > 75%; then, SB stenting if residual stenosis > 50% or there was a dissection). An elective 2-stent technique was applied in the aggressive strategy. The primary outcome was a 1-year target lesion failure (TLF) composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization. Results: Among non-true bifurcation lesions, the conservative strategy group used a smaller amount of contrast dye than the aggressive strategy group. There were no significant differences in 1-year TLF between the 2 strategies among non-true bifurcation lesions (6.5% vs 4.9%; HR, 1.31; 95%CI, 0.35-4.88; P =.687) and true bifurcation lesions (17.6% vs 21.7%; HR, 0.76; 95%CI, 0.20-2.83; P =.683). Conclusions: In patients with a LM bifurcation lesion, conservative and aggressive strategies for a provisional SB approach have similar 1-year TLF rates.

Translated title of the contributionOptimal strategy for side branch treatment in patients with left main coronary bifurcation lesions
Original languageSpanish
JournalRevista Espanola de Cardiologia
DOIs
Publication statusAccepted/In press - 2020

Keywords

  • Left main disease
  • Outcomes
  • Percutaneous coronary intervention
  • Side branch

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Optimal strategy for side branch treatment in patients with left main coronary bifurcation lesions'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this