Key result
This review describes contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention strategies for unprotected left main and bifurcation lesions, highlighting the benefits of drug-eluting stents.
This review summarizes contemporary percutaneous intervention strategies for complex coronary lesions, specifically unprotected left main and bifurcation lesions.
May guide PCI for complex lesions in selected patients; leaves open need for dedicated RCTs on optimal techniques.
Percutaneous coronary intervention has moved forward with great speed since the advent of stents and now more recently the introduction of drug-eluting technologies. This has seen the modern interventional cardiologist tackle more and more complex coronary lesions, of which unprotected left main (ULM) and bifurcations still remain challenging and controversial. ULM coronary artery stenosis traditionally remains a surgical indication although there have been recent reports and studies demonstrating the feasibility of a percutaneous strategy in select patient groups. Furthermore, drug-eluting stents have shown great benefit in reducing the problem of restenosis and have also become the mainstay treatment modality for bifurcation lesions with a choice between one- or two-stent strategies determined by the extent of disease burden in the main vessel and side branch and the response of the side branch ostium following treatment of the main vessel. This article will provide a contemporary review of percutaneous intervention for these two lesion subsets and describe the relative merits of each of the different strategies in current use with a glimpse into what the future may hold.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Barlis et al. (2006) conducted a review in Unprotected left main and bifurcation coronary lesions. Percutaneous coronary intervention was evaluated. This review describes contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention strategies for unprotected left main and bifurcation lesions, highlighting the benefits of drug-eluting stents.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: