Provisional vs. two-stent technique for unprotected left main coronary artery disease after ten years follow up: A propensity matched analysis
2016
Abstract Aims There is uncertainty on which
stentingapproach confers the best long-term outlook for unprotected left main (ULM) bifurcation disease. Methods and results This is a non-randomized, retrospective study including all consecutive patients with 50% stenosis of the left main involving at least 1 of the arteries stemming from the left main treated with
drug-eluting stents(DES) in 9 European centers between 2002 and 2004. Patients were divided into two groups: those treated with provisional
stentingsvs. those treated with two
stentstrategy. The outcomes of interest were 10-year rates of
target lesion
revascularization(TLR), major adverse cardiac events (
MACE), and their components (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction [MI], or repeat
revascularization), along with
stentthrombosis (ST). A total of 285 patients were included, 178 (62.5%) in the provisional
stentinggroup and 87 (37.5%) in the two
stentgroup. After 10years, no differences in TLR were found at unadjusted analysis (19% vs 25%, p>0.05) nor after
propensity score matching(25% vs 28%, p>0.05). Similar rates of
MACE(60% vs 66%, p>0.05), death (34% vs 43%, p>0.05), MI (9% vs 14%, p>0.05) and ST were also disclosed at propensity-based analysis. Conclusion Even after 10year follow-up, patients treated with provisional
stentingon left main showed comparable rates of
target lesion
revascularizationcompared to two
stentstrategy.
Keywords:
-
Correction
-
Source
-
Cite
-
Save
23
References
39
Citations
NaN
KQI