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
- korhan soylu
- Emmanouil S. Brilakis (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9416-9701)
- Pedro Carvalho (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6954-4925)
- Barkın Kültürsay (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1424-2209)
- Bavana Rangan
- Athanasios Rempakos (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2683-5255)
- Sandeep Jalli (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0008-3915-7853)
- Ali Karagöz (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0438-2021)
- Mahmut Uluganyan (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4578-4537)
- Konstantinos Voudris (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6464-293X)
- Ahmed Al‐Ogaili (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1481-8044)
- Olga Mastrodemos
- Deniz Mutlu (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4432-4595)
- Oleg V. Krestyaninov (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5214-8996)
- Dmitrii Khelimskii (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5419-913X)
- Dimitrios Strepkos (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6623-1715)
- Michaella Alexandrou (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9549-0748)
- M. Nicholas Burke (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0547-9976)
- Ufuk Yıldırım (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8848-8711)
- Yader Sandoval
Institutions
- 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)
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