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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |