Clinical and Angiographic Outcomes Comparison of Patients With Left Main Vs Non-Left Main Bifurcation Lesions Treated With Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Second-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents.

INTRODUCTION: It is not clear if differences exist about treating left main bifurcation (LMB) and non-left main bifurcation (non-LMB) lesions by means of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS: We prospectively analyzed all consecutive patients treated at our center for bifurcation lesions from January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2015, including acute myocardial infarction (MI) and cardiogenic shock, and compared the angiographic and clinical outcomes of patients with LMB and non-LMB lesions treated with PCI and second-generation drug-eluting stent (2G-DES) implantation. The primary endpoint was the major adverse cardiac event (MACE) composite, including MI, clinically indicated target-vessel revascularization (TVR), and cardiac death (CD) at 2-year follow-up. We also compared the angiographic patency of the vessel, which was a composite of the restenosis-reocclusion (RR) rate. RESULTS: Out of 1081 patients (1368 bifurcations), a total of 320 patients had LMB (29%). Overall, procedural success was 98.4%. Clinical follow-up rate was 100%. Angiographic follow-up rate was 83.7%. No differences were seen regarding the primary endpoint of all MACE (17.8% in LMB vs 18.0% in non-LMB; P>.99), MI rate (4.3% in LMB vs 2.9% in non-LMB; P=.20), and CD (8.7% in LMB vs 5.8% in non-LMB; P=.08). The overall RR rate was 11.8%, with 5% RR rate in the LMB group (16/320 lesions) and 9.7% RR rate in the non-LMB group (102/1048 lesions); P<.01. The LMB group had a better TVR rate (5.0% vs 9.4% in the non-LMB group; P=.01). CONCLUSION: PCI with 2G-DES for LMB has better target-vessel patency and TVR rates when compared with non-LMB lesions, without clinical differences in terms of 2-year clinical outcomes.

Angiographic and clinical outcome after crush of everolimus-eluting stent for distal unprotected left main disease.

Obiectives: Angiographic and clinical outcomes after crushing of everolimus-eluting stent (EES) for distal unprotected left main disease (ULMD). BACKGROUND: Few data exist about crushing of EES for distal ULMD. METHODS: From the Florence ULMD Percutaneous Coronary Interevention Registry consecutive patients with distal ULMD treated with EES were included in the analysis. Patients treated with provisional stenting were compared with patients treated with crush stenting. ENDPOINTS: angiographic in-segment restenosis rate, and 1-year clinical outcome. RESULTS: From 2008 to 2015, 405 patients with distal ULMD were treated with EES: 278 (69%) were treated with provisional stenting while 127 (31%) with crush stenting. Provisional stenting group compared to crush stenting group had higher incidence of acute coronary syndrome on admission (63% vs. 52%; P = 0.033) and of left ventricular ejection fraction ≤ 40% (36% vs. 23%; p= 0.008), while patients treated with crush stenting had more frequently diabetes mellitus (35% vs. 21%; P = 0.003) and 3-vessel coronary artery disease (46% vs. 29%; P < 0.001). Angiographic follow rate was 95%. Restenosis rates were similar: 7.1% in the crush stenting group and 5.8% in the provisional stenting group. There were no differences in 1-year clinical outcome between crush stenting group and provisional stenting group: major adverse cardiac events 11.1% and 11.2%, stent thrombosis 0.8% and 1.4%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Crush stenting using EES in patients with complex distal ULMD is associated with low rates of restenosis and adverse clinical events and could be considered as a valid double stenting technique in all patients with complex ULMD bifurcation lesions. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.