Search

Coronary bifurcation lesions account for 15-20% of all percutaneous coronary interventions. Percutaneous revascularization of these lesions is technically challenging and results in lower success rates than nonbifurcation lesions. There are unique procedural considerations and techniques that are employed in the percutaneous revascularization of these lesions. Our objective is to define the procedural complexities of treating coronary bifurcation lesions and describe the leading provisional and dedicated two stent techniques used to optimize procedural and clinical results, as described in the BIFURCAID app.

Background: Because of the widespread acceptance of percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents as an effective treatment strategy for in-stent restenosis, it is common to encounter multimetal layer stent restenosis in the recent years. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of such patients treated with intravascular brachytherapy (IVBT) in comparison with other percutaneous options., Methods and Results: We enrolled patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention during the period between 2011 and 2015 for recurrent drug-eluting stents in-stent restenosis with at least 2 layers of stents at the lesion site. This analysis compared patients who underwent treatment with IVBT and those who did not (non-IVBT group). The primary end point measured was major adverse cardiac events defined as a composite of target lesion revascularization, myocardial infarction, and all-cause mortality at 12 months. Adjusted associations were measured using propensity score matching. A total of 328 percutaneous coronary intervention patients met the eligibility criteria, of which 197 patients received IVBT, and 131 patients underwent routine percutaneous intervention. The primary end point was significantly lower in patients undergoing IVBT (13.2% and 28.2%; P=0.01). A propensity score matching for risk factors of in-stent restenosis identified 182 patients. The advantages of IVBT with regard to 1-year major adverse cardiac events were confirmed in this matched cohort (13.2% and 30.8%; adjusted hazard ratio [95% CI]: 0.37 [0.18-0.73]; P<0.01)., Conclusions: In this analysis, IVBT led to significantly lower major adverse cardiac events in patients with multilayered drug-eluting stents restenosis when compared with other percutaneous options at 1-year follow-up.

Objectives: The aim of the study was to compare the acute outcomes of Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) and second-generation drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation in routine clinical practice. There is a paucity of data regarding BVS use in a real-world patient population., Methods: The study population comprised 40 consecutive patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with BVS implantation at a tertiary-care center in New York, New York between July and December of 2016. An optimal implantation technique including adequate lesion preparation, mandatory postdilation, and optical coherence tomography (OCT) imaging was used in all cases. De novo lesions treated with BVS were compared to lesions treated with DES matched by OCT calcium arc, scaffold/stent size, use of atherectomy device, and lesion postdilation. Acute lumen gain, minimal device area, malapposition, eccentricity, and symmetry index were assessed using OCT., Results: We analyzed OCT images of 40 BVS cases and 40 matching DES cases from 35 and 40 patients, respectively. Compared to the DES group, the BVS group demonstrated similar acute lumen gain, minimal scaffold/stent area, eccentricity index, and symmetry index after PCI. There were fewer malapposed struts detected after BVS implantation; however, malapposition distance and length were not different between the groups., Conclusion: BVS implantation in a real-world patient population with optimal implantation technique resulted in similar stent expansion and better strut apposition compared to DES implantation.