Cargando…

Randomized non-inferiority TrIal comParing reverse T And Protrusion versus double-kissing and crush Stenting for the treatment of complex left main bifurcation lesions

BACKGROUND: The treatment of left main bifurcation stenoses remains challenging. AIMS: We compare the “Reverse T and Protrusion” (reverse-TAP) technique to Double-Kissing and crush (DK-crush). METHODS: The study was designed as non-inferiority trial, the primary endpoint was percentage stent expansi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Olschewski, Maximilian, Ullrich, Helen, Knorr, Maike, Makmur, Giulio, Ahoopai, Majid, Münzel, Thomas, Gori, Tommaso
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9242916/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34816311
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00392-021-01972-2
_version_ 1784738167131209728
author Olschewski, Maximilian
Ullrich, Helen
Knorr, Maike
Makmur, Giulio
Ahoopai, Majid
Münzel, Thomas
Gori, Tommaso
author_facet Olschewski, Maximilian
Ullrich, Helen
Knorr, Maike
Makmur, Giulio
Ahoopai, Majid
Münzel, Thomas
Gori, Tommaso
author_sort Olschewski, Maximilian
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The treatment of left main bifurcation stenoses remains challenging. AIMS: We compare the “Reverse T and Protrusion” (reverse-TAP) technique to Double-Kissing and crush (DK-crush). METHODS: The study was designed as non-inferiority trial, the primary endpoint was percentage stent expansion in the ostial side branch at optical coherence tomography. RESULTS: 52 consecutive patients (13 females, 17 diabetics, Syntax score 25 [22–29]) with complex coronary bifurcation lesions of the left main were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to Reverse-TAP or DK-crush stenting. The intervention was performed according to protocol in all patients in both randomization groups. Side branch stent expansion was 75 [67–90]% in the DK-crush group and 86 [75–95]% in the reverse-TAP group (one-sided 97.5% lower parametric confidence interval: − 0.28%; P < 0.01 for non-inferiority; P = 0.037 for superiority). Side branch balloon pressure during final kissing was higher in the DK-crush group (14 [12–16] vs. reverse-TAP: 13 [12–14]; P = 0.043). Procedural time was shorter with reverse-TAP (DK-crush: 32 [24–44] min vs reverse–TAP: 25 [22–33] min; P = 0.044). Other procedural parameters were not different between groups. There was no difference in any of the safety endpoints up to 1 month. CONCLUSIONS: A reverse-TAP strategy for the interventional treatment of complex coronary lesions was non-inferior and superior to DK-crush for the primary endpoint side branch expansion while requiring less time. A larger study testing long-term clinical outcomes is warranted. TRAIL REGISTRATION: NCT: NCT03714750. GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT: [Image: see text] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00392-021-01972-2.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9242916
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92429162022-07-01 Randomized non-inferiority TrIal comParing reverse T And Protrusion versus double-kissing and crush Stenting for the treatment of complex left main bifurcation lesions Olschewski, Maximilian Ullrich, Helen Knorr, Maike Makmur, Giulio Ahoopai, Majid Münzel, Thomas Gori, Tommaso Clin Res Cardiol Original Paper BACKGROUND: The treatment of left main bifurcation stenoses remains challenging. AIMS: We compare the “Reverse T and Protrusion” (reverse-TAP) technique to Double-Kissing and crush (DK-crush). METHODS: The study was designed as non-inferiority trial, the primary endpoint was percentage stent expansion in the ostial side branch at optical coherence tomography. RESULTS: 52 consecutive patients (13 females, 17 diabetics, Syntax score 25 [22–29]) with complex coronary bifurcation lesions of the left main were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to Reverse-TAP or DK-crush stenting. The intervention was performed according to protocol in all patients in both randomization groups. Side branch stent expansion was 75 [67–90]% in the DK-crush group and 86 [75–95]% in the reverse-TAP group (one-sided 97.5% lower parametric confidence interval: − 0.28%; P < 0.01 for non-inferiority; P = 0.037 for superiority). Side branch balloon pressure during final kissing was higher in the DK-crush group (14 [12–16] vs. reverse-TAP: 13 [12–14]; P = 0.043). Procedural time was shorter with reverse-TAP (DK-crush: 32 [24–44] min vs reverse–TAP: 25 [22–33] min; P = 0.044). Other procedural parameters were not different between groups. There was no difference in any of the safety endpoints up to 1 month. CONCLUSIONS: A reverse-TAP strategy for the interventional treatment of complex coronary lesions was non-inferior and superior to DK-crush for the primary endpoint side branch expansion while requiring less time. A larger study testing long-term clinical outcomes is warranted. TRAIL REGISTRATION: NCT: NCT03714750. GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT: [Image: see text] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00392-021-01972-2. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021-11-24 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9242916/ /pubmed/34816311 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00392-021-01972-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Paper
Olschewski, Maximilian
Ullrich, Helen
Knorr, Maike
Makmur, Giulio
Ahoopai, Majid
Münzel, Thomas
Gori, Tommaso
Randomized non-inferiority TrIal comParing reverse T And Protrusion versus double-kissing and crush Stenting for the treatment of complex left main bifurcation lesions
title Randomized non-inferiority TrIal comParing reverse T And Protrusion versus double-kissing and crush Stenting for the treatment of complex left main bifurcation lesions
title_full Randomized non-inferiority TrIal comParing reverse T And Protrusion versus double-kissing and crush Stenting for the treatment of complex left main bifurcation lesions
title_fullStr Randomized non-inferiority TrIal comParing reverse T And Protrusion versus double-kissing and crush Stenting for the treatment of complex left main bifurcation lesions
title_full_unstemmed Randomized non-inferiority TrIal comParing reverse T And Protrusion versus double-kissing and crush Stenting for the treatment of complex left main bifurcation lesions
title_short Randomized non-inferiority TrIal comParing reverse T And Protrusion versus double-kissing and crush Stenting for the treatment of complex left main bifurcation lesions
title_sort randomized non-inferiority trial comparing reverse t and protrusion versus double-kissing and crush stenting for the treatment of complex left main bifurcation lesions
topic Original Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9242916/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34816311
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00392-021-01972-2
work_keys_str_mv AT olschewskimaximilian randomizednoninferioritytrialcomparingreversetandprotrusionversusdoublekissingandcrushstentingforthetreatmentofcomplexleftmainbifurcationlesions
AT ullrichhelen randomizednoninferioritytrialcomparingreversetandprotrusionversusdoublekissingandcrushstentingforthetreatmentofcomplexleftmainbifurcationlesions
AT knorrmaike randomizednoninferioritytrialcomparingreversetandprotrusionversusdoublekissingandcrushstentingforthetreatmentofcomplexleftmainbifurcationlesions
AT makmurgiulio randomizednoninferioritytrialcomparingreversetandprotrusionversusdoublekissingandcrushstentingforthetreatmentofcomplexleftmainbifurcationlesions
AT ahoopaimajid randomizednoninferioritytrialcomparingreversetandprotrusionversusdoublekissingandcrushstentingforthetreatmentofcomplexleftmainbifurcationlesions
AT munzelthomas randomizednoninferioritytrialcomparingreversetandprotrusionversusdoublekissingandcrushstentingforthetreatmentofcomplexleftmainbifurcationlesions
AT goritommaso randomizednoninferioritytrialcomparingreversetandprotrusionversusdoublekissingandcrushstentingforthetreatmentofcomplexleftmainbifurcationlesions