Bifurcation lesions.

Antonio Colombo
{"title":"Bifurcation lesions.","authors":"Antonio Colombo","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The introduction of drug-eluting stents has significantly improved the immediate and long-term results following treatment of bifurcation coronary lesions. Despite these improvements, few questions are still without a clear answer. Among them the most important one is the need to use two stents vs provisional side branch stenting in true bifurcations. At present time the approach most frequently applied is to stent the main branch stenting to the side branch only for suboptimal results. In situations when the operator needs two stents as intention to treat we suggest the usage of the \"Crush\" or \"V\" technique. These two approaches have been utilized with good immediate and long-term results with sirolimus-eluting stents and with polymer-based paclitaxel-eluting stents. The usage of the \"Crush\" technique followed by final dilation of the side branch and with kissing balloon inflation has decreased. We recently evaluated results with this technique in 70 patients treated with sirolimus-eluting stents. The 6-month angiographic follow-up was available in 83% of the lesions and restenosis rate was 33% (7% main and side branches and 26% only side branch). No difference was observed in the restenosis rate on the main branch between lesions treated with final kissing balloon inflation and lesions without final kissing inflation (4% in the final kissing group vs 8% in the no final kissing group, p = 1.00). The restenosis rate on the side branch was lower in the final kissing group (17%) in comparison to the no final kissing group (42%) (p = 0.046). Similar results are achieved with polymer-based paclitaxel-eluting stents. The introduction of drug-eluting stents with selective usage of stenting the main and side branches applying the \"Crush\" or \"V\" techniques has significantly improved the results compared to bare metal stents in bifurcation lesions.</p>","PeriodicalId":80289,"journal":{"name":"Italian heart journal : official journal of the Italian Federation of Cardiology","volume":"6 6","pages":"475-88"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2005-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Italian heart journal : official journal of the Italian Federation of Cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The introduction of drug-eluting stents has significantly improved the immediate and long-term results following treatment of bifurcation coronary lesions. Despite these improvements, few questions are still without a clear answer. Among them the most important one is the need to use two stents vs provisional side branch stenting in true bifurcations. At present time the approach most frequently applied is to stent the main branch stenting to the side branch only for suboptimal results. In situations when the operator needs two stents as intention to treat we suggest the usage of the "Crush" or "V" technique. These two approaches have been utilized with good immediate and long-term results with sirolimus-eluting stents and with polymer-based paclitaxel-eluting stents. The usage of the "Crush" technique followed by final dilation of the side branch and with kissing balloon inflation has decreased. We recently evaluated results with this technique in 70 patients treated with sirolimus-eluting stents. The 6-month angiographic follow-up was available in 83% of the lesions and restenosis rate was 33% (7% main and side branches and 26% only side branch). No difference was observed in the restenosis rate on the main branch between lesions treated with final kissing balloon inflation and lesions without final kissing inflation (4% in the final kissing group vs 8% in the no final kissing group, p = 1.00). The restenosis rate on the side branch was lower in the final kissing group (17%) in comparison to the no final kissing group (42%) (p = 0.046). Similar results are achieved with polymer-based paclitaxel-eluting stents. The introduction of drug-eluting stents with selective usage of stenting the main and side branches applying the "Crush" or "V" techniques has significantly improved the results compared to bare metal stents in bifurcation lesions.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
分叉病变。
药物洗脱支架的引入显著改善了冠状动脉分叉病变治疗后的即时和长期结果。尽管有了这些改进,但仍有几个问题没有明确的答案。其中最重要的是需要使用两个支架与临时侧支支架在真正的分叉。目前最常用的方法是将主支支架置入侧支,但效果不理想。在需要两个支架作为意向治疗的情况下,我们建议使用“Crush”或“V”技术。这两种方法用于西罗莫司洗脱支架和聚合物基紫杉醇洗脱支架均具有良好的即时和长期效果。使用“挤压”技术,随后的最后扩张侧分支和亲吻气球膨胀已经减少。我们最近评估了该技术在70例接受西罗莫司洗脱支架治疗的患者中的效果。83%的病变进行了6个月的血管造影随访,再狭窄率为33%(7%为主分支和侧分支,26%为侧分支)。最后一吻气球充气组与未最后一吻气球充气组的主要分支再狭窄率无差异(最后一吻组为4%,未最后一吻组为8%,p = 1.00)。末吻组侧支再狭窄率(17%)低于未末吻组(42%)(p = 0.046)。聚合物基紫杉醇洗脱支架也获得了类似的结果。引入药物洗脱支架,选择性地使用“Crush”或“V”技术在主分支和侧分支进行支架植入,与裸金属支架相比,在分叉病变中显著改善了结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Evidence for a "gender paradox" in diabetic patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: adverse preprocedural risk but favorable long-term clinical outcome in women. Ectasia of the ascending aorta at the time of aortic valve surgery: replace or relax? A clinical approach for cardiovascular monitoring of HIV-infected patients. Results from an observational cohort study. Surgical treatment of an aneurysm originating from a Kommerell's diverticulum in the right-sided aortic arch with retroesophageal component. Double aneurysm of the left ventricular wall following cardiac perforation after aortic valvuloplasty.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1