Abstract 4140163: Initial Experience with Mini-Crush Versus Double Kissing Crush in Bifurcation Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Insights from PROGRESS-BIFURCATION registry

Background: There is limited data on use of the mini-crush technique in two-stent bifurcation percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Methods: This retrospective, observational, cohort study was performed across 6 centers in the United States, Russia, and Turkey between 2013-2024, as part of the Prospective Global Registry of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Bifurcation Lesions (PROGRESS-BIFURCATION, NCT05100992). We evaluated procedural characteristics of patients who underwent bifurcation stenting using the mini-crush technique and compared it with those who were treated with double kissing (DK) crush. Results: Of 1,138 PCIs involving 1,499 lesions, 46 (4.04%) were performed using the mini-crush technique and 147 lesions (12.91%) using the DK crush technique. Baseline characteristics of the patients were similar in both groups. There was no difference between mini-crush versus DK-crush in technical success (100.0% versus 98.6%; p=0.99), procedural success (95.1% versus 97.1%, p=0.62), procedural complications (10.9% versus 14.7%, p=0.51), or in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (6.5% versus 5.7%, p=0.73). In contrast, mini-crush technique was associated with shorter procedure time (79.00 vs 116.50 minutes; p<0.001; Figure 1A), fluoroscopy time (23.50 vs 30.35 minutes, p=0.002; Figure 1A), and lower contrast volume (150 versus 109 milliliters; p<0.001; Figure 1B), and air kerma radiation dose (1.11 vs 1.71 gray; p=0.024; Figure 1C). Conclusion: In patients undergoing PCI for bifurcation lesions, the mini-crush technique had similar rates of procedural complications and in-hospital MACE as compared with the DK crush technique but required less contrast volume, fluoroscopy time, radiation dose, and procedural time.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Circulation
Published
2024-11-11
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1161/circ.150.suppl_1.4140163
Primary Topic
Coronary Interventions and Diagnostics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Abstract 4140163: Initial Experience with Mini-Crush Versus Double Kissing Crush in Bifurcation Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Insights from PROGRESS-BIFURCATION registry

korhan soylu, Emmanouil S. Brilakis, Pedro Carvalho, Barkın Kültürsay et al.
Circulation
Coronary Interventions and Diagnostics
article

Abstract 4140163: Initial Experience with Mini-Crush Versus Double Kissing Crush in Bifurcation Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Insights from PROGRESS-BIFURCATION registry

korhan soylu, Emmanouil S. Brilakis, Pedro Carvalho, Barkın Kültürsay, Bavana Rangan, Athanasios Rempakos, Sandeep Jalli, Ali Karagöz, Mahmut Uluganyan, Konstantinos Voudris, Ahmed Al‐Ogaili, Olga Mastrodemos, Deniz Mutlu, Oleg V. Krestyaninov, Dmitrii Khelimskii, Dimitrios Strepkos, Michaella Alexandrou, M. Nicholas Burke, Ufuk Yıldırım, Yader Sandoval
article en

Abstract

Background: There is limited data on use of the mini-crush technique in two-stent bifurcation percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Methods: This retrospective, observational, cohort study was performed across 6 centers in the United States, Russia, and Turkey between 2013-2024, as part of the Prospective Global Registry of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Bifurcation Lesions (PROGRESS-BIFURCATION, NCT05100992). We evaluated procedural characteristics of patients who underwent bifurcation stenting using the mini-crush technique and compared it with those who were treated with double kissing (DK) crush. Results: Of 1,138 PCIs involving 1,499 lesions, 46 (4.04%) were performed using the mini-crush technique and 147 lesions (12.91%) using the DK crush technique. Baseline characteristics of the patients were similar in both groups. There was no difference between mini-crush versus DK-crush in technical success (100.0% versus 98.6%; p=0.99), procedural success (95.1% versus 97.1%, p=0.62), procedural complications (10.9% versus 14.7%, p=0.51), or in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (6.5% versus 5.7%, p=0.73). In contrast, mini-crush technique was associated with shorter procedure time (79.00 vs 116.50 minutes; p<0.001; Figure 1A), fluoroscopy time (23.50 vs 30.35 minutes, p=0.002; Figure 1A), and lower contrast volume (150 versus 109 milliliters; p<0.001; Figure 1B), and air kerma radiation dose (1.11 vs 1.71 gray; p=0.024; Figure 1C). Conclusion: In patients undergoing PCI for bifurcation lesions, the mini-crush technique had similar rates of procedural complications and in-hospital MACE as compared with the DK crush technique but required less contrast volume, fluoroscopy time, radiation dose, and procedural time.

CirculationVol. 150(Suppl_1)
Allina Health (US), Ondokuz Mayıs University (TR), Bezmiâlem Vakıf Üniversitesi (TR), Minneapolis Heart Institute Foundation (US), Kartal Koşuyolu High Specialization Training and Research Hospital (TR), Meshalkin National Medical Research Center (RU)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 62%
Coronary Interventions and Diagnostics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.