Cargando…

Six-months clinical and intracoronary imaging follow-up after reverse T and protrusion or double-kissing and crush stenting for the treatment of complex left main bifurcation lesions

BACKGROUND: There is a debate regarding the best stent strategy for unprotected distal left main (LM) bifurcation disease. Among two-stent techniques, double-kissing and crush (DKC) is favored in current guidelines but is complex and requires expertise. Reverse T and Protrusion (rTAP) was shown to b...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Abouelnour, Amr EI, Olschewski, Maximilian, Makmur, Giulio, Ullrich, Helen, Knorr, Maike, Ahoopai, Majid, Münzel, Thomas, Gori, Tommaso
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10174439/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37180808
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2023.1153652
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: There is a debate regarding the best stent strategy for unprotected distal left main (LM) bifurcation disease. Among two-stent techniques, double-kissing and crush (DKC) is favored in current guidelines but is complex and requires expertise. Reverse T and Protrusion (rTAP) was shown to be a comparable strategy regarding short-term efficacy and safety, but with reduced procedural complexity. AIM: To compare rTAP vs. DKC by optical coherence tomography (OCT) on the intermediate term. METHODS: 52 consecutive patients with complex unprotected LM stenoses (Medina 0,1,1 or 1,1,1) were randomized to either DKC or rTAP and followed-up for a median of 189[180–263] days for clinical and OCT outcomes. RESULTS: At follow-up OCT showed similar change in the side branch (SB) ostial area (primary endpoint). The confluence polygon showed a higher percentage of malapposed stent struts in the rTAP group that did not reach statistical significance (rTAP: 9.7[4.4–18.3] % vs. DKC: 3[0.07–10.9] %; p = 0.064). It also showed a trend towards larger neointimal area relative to the stent area (DKC: 8.8 [6.9 to 13.4] % vs. rTAP: 6.5 [3.9 to 8.9] %; p = 0.07), and smaller luminal area (DKC: 9.54[8.09–11.07] mm(2) vs. rTAP: 11.21[9.53–12.42] mm²; p = 0.09) in the DKC group. The minimum luminal area in the parent vessel distal to the bifurcation was significantly smaller in the DKC group (DKC: 4.64 [3.64 to 5.34] mm² vs. rTAP: 6.76 [5.20 to 7.29] mm²; p = 0.03). This segment also showed a trend for smaller stent areas (p = 0.05 to 0.09), and a bigger neointimal area relative to the stent area (DKC: 8.94 [5.43 to 10.5]% vs. rTAP: 4.75 [0.08 to 8.5]%; p = 0.06) in the DKC patients. The incidence of clinical events was comparably low in both groups. CONCLUSION: At 6-months, OCT showed a similar change in the SB ostial area (primary endpoint) in rTAP compared to DKC. There was also a trend for smaller luminal areas in the confluence polygon and the distal parent vessel, and a larger neointimal area relative to the stent area, in DKC, along with a tendency for more malapposed stent struts in rTAP. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03714750, identifier: NCT03714750.