Abstract 4141481: Outcomes of the upfront two stent strategies for bifurcation percutaneous coronary interventions: Insights from PROGRESS-BIFURCATION registry
Background: Upfront two-stent techniques are often used in bifurcation percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI), but there is controversy about optimal strategy selection. Methods: We examined the clinical, angiographic characteristics, and long-term outcomes of 206 bifurcation PCIs using the double kissing (DK) crush or the culotte techniques in 192 patients between 2014-2023 from the Prospective Global Registry for the Study of Bifurcation Lesion Interventions (NCT05100992). For the long-term outcomes adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using the mixed effects Cox proportional hazards model. Results: DK crush was more commonly used (70.4%). Patients in the culotte group had similar baseline characteristics with the DK crush group. Lesions treated with culotte were more likely to be in the left anterior descending (54.1% vs. 35.9%, p<0.001) and circumflex arteries (21.3% vs. 9.0%, p<0.001), had smaller proximal (3.50 [3.00, 3.75] vs. 3.50 [3.30, 4.00] mm, p=0.032) and distal (3.00 [2.75, 3.00] vs. 3.00 [3.00, 3.50] mm, p=0.047) main vessel diameters, and were less likely to have severe calcification (6.6% vs. 32.4%, p<0.001). Technical success (96.7% vs. 98.6%, p=0.583), procedural success (93.1% vs. 93.9%, p=0.758), and in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (3.4% vs. 6.1%, p=0.726) were similar in both groups. During a mean follow-up of 38-month, 32 (28.3%) patients experienced MACE. On multivariable analysis, culotte was associated with similar MACE (aHR 1.19; 95%CI 0.78-1.80; p=0.680), mortality (aHR 1.11; 95%CI 0.68-1.79; p=0.810), and target vessel PCI revascularization (aHR 0.58; 95%CI 0.30-1.13; p=0.460) compared with DK crush (Figure). Conclusions: Bifurcation PCI with DK crush and culotte had similarly high technical and procedural success, low in-hospital MACE, and long-term outcomes.
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
- Michaella Alexandrou
- Athanasios Rempakos (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2683-5255)
- Sandeep Jalli (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0008-3915-7853)
- 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)
- M. Nicholas Burke (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0547-9976)
- Ufuk Yıldırım (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8848-8711)
- Ali Karagöz (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1106-3659)
- 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_1.4141481
- Primary Topic
- Coronary Interventions and Diagnostics
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.00