Long-term results after PCI of unprotected distal left main coronary artery stenosis: the Bifurcations Bad Krozingen (BBK)-Left Main Registry.
Aged
Cause of Death
/ trends
Coronary Angiography
Coronary Stenosis
/ diagnosis
Coronary Vessels
/ diagnostic imaging
Drug-Eluting Stents
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Germany
/ epidemiology
Humans
Male
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
/ methods
Prognosis
Registries
Retrospective Studies
Risk Factors
Survival Rate
/ trends
Time Factors
Treatment Outcome
Bifurcation
Distal left main stenosis
Drug-eluting stents
Reintervention
Restenosis
TAP stenting
Journal
Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society
ISSN: 1861-0692
Titre abrégé: Clin Res Cardiol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 101264123
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Feb 2019
Feb 2019
Historique:
received:
02
02
2018
accepted:
16
07
2018
pubmed:
28
7
2018
medline:
8
5
2019
entrez:
28
7
2018
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
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. 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). 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.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30051181
doi: 10.1007/s00392-018-1337-9
pii: 10.1007/s00392-018-1337-9
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
175-184Références
Circulation. 2007 May 1;115(17):2344-51
pubmed: 17470709
Circulation. 2009 Nov 10;120(19):1866-74
pubmed: 19858414
Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2008 Dec;1(3):185-92
pubmed: 20031677
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010 Jul 6;56(2):117-24
pubmed: 20451344
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2011 May 1;77(6):775-82
pubmed: 21520380
EuroIntervention. 2012 Nov 22;8(7):803-14
pubmed: 23171801
Lancet. 2013 Feb 23;381(9867):629-38
pubmed: 23439102
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013 Apr 9;61(14):1482-8
pubmed: 23490040
J Invasive Cardiol. 2014 Jun;26(6):229-33
pubmed: 24907076
EuroIntervention. 2014 Sep;10(5):545-60
pubmed: 25256198
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2015 Jun;85(7):1132-8
pubmed: 25614097
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015 May 26;65(20):2198-206
pubmed: 25787197
Clin Res Cardiol. 2016 Mar;105(3):230-8
pubmed: 26329585
Clin Res Cardiol. 2016 Jul;105(7):575-84
pubmed: 26689707
Int J Cardiol. 2016 May 15;211:37-42
pubmed: 26970964
EuroIntervention. 2016 May 17;12(1):47-52
pubmed: 27173861
N Engl J Med. 2016 Dec 8;375(23):2223-2235
pubmed: 27797291
Lancet. 2016 Dec 3;388(10061):2743-2752
pubmed: 27810312
Clin Res Cardiol. 2017 Dec;106(12):953-959
pubmed: 28776266
EuroIntervention. 2018 Jan 20;13(13):1540-1553
pubmed: 29061550
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017 Nov 28;70(21):2605-2617
pubmed: 29096915