Ge L, Iakovou I, Cosgrave J, Agostoni P, Airoldi F, Sangiorgi G M, Michev I, Chieffo A, Montorfano M, Carlino M, Corvaja N, Colombo A
EMO Centro Cuore Columbus, San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy.
Heart. 2006 Mar;92(3):371-6. doi: 10.1136/hrt.2005.061531. Epub 2005 Jun 17.
To compare long term outcomes of the crush versus the T technique in bifurcation lesions.
182 consecutive patients were identified who underwent percutaneous coronary interventions for bifurcation lesions with drug eluting stents between April 2002 and January 2004. Two techniques were used according to the operator's discretion: crush (group C, n = 121) or T (group T, n = 61).
In-hospital outcome differed significantly between the two groups. Angiographic follow up was available for 142 (78%) patients. Groups C and T did not differ significantly regarding late loss (0.42 (0.39) mm v 0.34 (0.35) mm, p = 0.52) and rate of restenosis (16.2% v 13.0%, p = 0.80) in both the main and the side branch without final kissing balloon post-dilatation. However, when final kissing balloon post-dilatation was performed, group C had significantly lower late lumen loss (0.23 (0.21) mm v 0.37 (0.33) mm, p = 0.02) and restenosis rate (8.6% v 26.5%, p = 0.04) in the side branch. At one year's clinical follow up, group C compared with group T had lower rates of target lesion revascularisation (14.0% v 31.1%, p = 0.01) and target vessel revascularisation (16.5% v 32.8%, p = 0.02).
In non-selected bifurcation lesions treated with drug eluting stents, the restenosis rate remains relatively high in the side branch. Compared with the T stenting technique, crush stenting with kissing balloon post-dilatation is associated with a reduced rate of restenosis in the side branch.
比较挤压技术与T型技术治疗分叉病变的长期疗效。
纳入2002年4月至2004年1月期间连续182例接受药物洗脱支架经皮冠状动脉介入治疗分叉病变的患者。根据术者的判断使用两种技术:挤压技术(C组,n = 121)或T型技术(T组,n = 61)。
两组的院内结局有显著差异。142例(78%)患者有血管造影随访资料。在未进行最终吻接球囊后扩张的主支和分支中,C组和T组在晚期管腔丢失(0.42(0.39)mm对0.34(0.35)mm,p = 0.52)和再狭窄率(16.2%对13.0%,p = 0.80)方面无显著差异。然而,当进行最终吻接球囊后扩张时,C组分支的晚期管腔丢失(0.23(0.21)mm对0.37(0.33)mm,p = 0.02)和再狭窄率(8.6%对26.5%,p = 0.04)显著更低。在1年的临床随访中,C组与T组相比,靶病变血运重建率(14.0%对31.1%,p = 0.01)和靶血管血运重建率(16.5%对32.8%,p = 0.02)更低。
在使用药物洗脱支架治疗的未选择的分叉病变中,分支的再狭窄率仍然相对较高。与T型支架技术相比,挤压式支架置入术联合吻接球囊后扩张与分支再狭窄率降低相关。