Department of Cardiology, Nanjing First Hospital, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, 210006 China.
EuroIntervention. 2012 Nov 22;8(7):803-14. doi: 10.4244/EIJV8I7A123.
The present study aimed to compare the long-term (five-year) safety and efficacy between the one-stent, two-stent and double-kissing (DK) crush strategies, utilising drug-eluting stents, for unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) bifurcation lesions.
Between March 2004 and April 2007, 633 consecutive patients with ULMCA bifurcation lesions (232 in the one-stent group and 401 in the two-stent group) were prospectively enrolled. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), and target vessel revascularisation (TVR), at five-year follow-up. Patients in the the two-stent group were classified as DK crush (n=155) and other two-stent techniques (culotte, T-stenting, kissing stenting and classical crush, n=246). Forty-seven (16.8%) patients in the one-stent group crossed over to the two-stent group. The one-stent group was associated with an increased incidence of MI compared to the two-stent approach (10.5% vs. 5.5%, p=0.025). The crude rate of MACE at five years was 28.0% in the one-stent group and 28.4% in the two-stent group (p=0.927). DK crush was associated with a significantly decreased five-year MACE compared to the other two-stent approaches or the one-stent approach (DK crush: 14.8% vs. other two-stent approaches: 37.0%, one-stent approach: 28.0%, p<0.001). The main benefit of DK crush primarily appeared to be secondary to a reduction in TVR (7.7% vs. 30.5% vs. 18.1%, p<0.001). By Cox regression analyses, the non-DK crush two-stent technique, a high SYNTAX Score (≥33) or New Risk Stratification (NERS) score (>20), and incomplete revascularisation were shown to be independent predictors of MACE at five-year follow-up.
With distal left main true bifurcations, the two-stent technique (excluding DK crush) is an independent predictor of long-term MACE. DK crush is associated with more favourable long-term clinical outcomes. Confirmation of these findings is required from randomised controlled trials.
本研究旨在比较经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)中应用药物洗脱支架(DES)治疗无保护左主干(ULMCA)分叉病变时,单支架、双支架和双吻(DK)挤压策略的 5 年长期安全性和疗效。
2004 年 3 月至 2007 年 4 月,前瞻性纳入 633 例 ULMCA 分叉病变患者(单支架组 232 例,双支架组 401 例)。主要终点为 5 年随访时主要不良心脏事件(MACE)的发生,MACE 为心源性死亡、心肌梗死(MI)和靶血管血运重建(TVR)的复合终点。双支架组患者分为 DK 挤压组(n=155)和其他双支架技术组(culotte、T 支架、吻合并支架及经典挤压,n=246)。单支架组中有 47 例(16.8%)患者交叉至双支架组。与双支架组相比,单支架组 MI 的发生率更高(10.5% vs. 5.5%,p=0.025)。单支架组 5 年 MACE 的粗率为 28.0%,双支架组为 28.4%(p=0.927)。与其他双支架技术或单支架技术相比,DK 挤压组 5 年 MACE 显著降低(DK 挤压组:14.8% vs. 其他双支架技术组:37.0%,单支架组:28.0%,p<0.001)。DK 挤压的主要获益主要归因于 TVR 的降低(7.7% vs. 30.5% vs. 18.1%,p<0.001)。Cox 回归分析显示,非 DK 挤压双支架技术、高 SYNTAX 评分(≥33)或新危险分层(NERS)评分(>20)和不完全血运重建是 5 年随访时 MACE 的独立预测因素。
对于远端左主干真分叉病变,双支架技术(不包括 DK 挤压)是长期 MACE 的独立预测因素。DK 挤压与更有利的长期临床结局相关。需要随机对照试验来证实这些发现。