Key result
Upfront two-stent bifurcation techniques show comparable 6-month MACE rates among DK-crush, mini-culotte, and T/TAP.
Why the study?
Percutaneous coronary intervention remains controversial for coronary bifurcation lesions, prompting a comparison of different upfront two-stenting techniques recommended by guidelines for true complex lesions.
Does the choice of upfront two-stent strategy (DK-crush, mini-culotte, or T/TAP) affect the 6-month MACE rate in patients with true coronary bifurcation lesions?
Cohort (n=142)
No
Does the choice of upfront two-stent strategy (DK-crush, mini-culotte, or T/TAP) affect the 6-month MACE rate in patients with true coronary bifurcation lesions?
p-value: p=0.137
Different upfront two-stent strategies for true coronary bifurcation lesions showed comparable and low short-term MACE rates, with previous myocardial infarction identified as the only independent predictor of adverse events.
Comparable short-term MACE rates support individualized technique selection; leaves open optimal upfront two-stent strategy pending randomized trials.
Background: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains controversial for coronary bifurcation lesions (CBLs), and over the years, several stent techniques have been developed. Current guidelines on myocardial revascularization recommend an upfront two-stent strategy (U2SS) for complex CBLs. This study was aimed at comparing different upfront two-stenting techniques for true complex CBLs. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 142 consecutive patients with true coronary bifurcation lesions who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention using an upfront two-stent strategy (DK-crush, mini-culotte, or T/TAP) between June 2019 and September 2022. Clinical, angiographic, and procedural characteristics, as well as 6-month clinical outcomes, were compared among the three groups. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), and independent predictors of MACE were evaluated using a multivariable Firth penalized logistic regression analysis. Results: Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) [a composite of death, stent thrombosis, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization] occurred in 6.3% of the study population at a median follow-up period of 6 months. There were no significant differences in the primary clinical outcomes among the groups. Although the DK-crush group had the lowest observed incidence of MACE, this difference did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.137). A multivariable Firth penalized logistic regression analysis identified previous myocardial infarction as the only independent predictor of MACE (adjusted OR: 4.33; 95% CI: 1.10–23.61; p = 0.035). Conclusions: Within the limitations of this study, all upfront two-stent strategies appeared feasible and were associated with relatively low short-term MACE rates. No significant differences in clinical outcomes were observed among the evaluated techniques. Previous myocardial infarction was identified as an independent predictor of MACE in the multivariable analysis.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Esenboğa et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in True coronary bifurcation lesions (n=142). Upfront two-stent strategies (DK-crush, mini-culotte, or T/TAP) vs. Comparison among techniques was evaluated on Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) at 6 months (p=0.137). Upfront two-stent strategies (DK-crush, mini-culotte, and T/TAP) showed no statistically significant differences in the 6-month incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (p=0.137).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: