Key result
Upfront two-stent strategy shows no mortality benefit over provisional stenting in left main PCI.
Why the study?
Optimal stenting strategy for distal unprotected left main coronary artery bifurcation disease remains uncertain, necessitating evaluation of long-term outcomes by intended strategy.
Does an intended upfront two-stent strategy compared to a provisional stenting strategy reduce long-term all-cause mortality in patients undergoing PCI for unprotected distal LMCA bifurcation disease?
Cohort (n=234)
No
Does an intended upfront two-stent strategy compared to a provisional stenting strategy reduce long-term all-cause mortality in patients undergoing PCI for unprotected distal LMCA bifurcation disease?
In patients undergoing PCI for distal unprotected LMCA bifurcation disease, an initially intended two-stent strategy did not significantly differ from a provisional strategy in terms of long-term all-cause mortality, though it was associated with higher rates of target-lesion revascularization and in-hospital stroke.
May inform intended stenting strategy selection in stable distal LMCA bifurcation PCI; leaves open need for randomized trials to guide practice.
Background: Optimal stenting for distal unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) bifurcation disease remains uncertain. We evaluated long-term outcomes by initially intended strategy. Methods: This retrospective, single-centre cohort included 234 consecutive patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) without acute coronary syndrome, classified by intended strategy irrespective of crossover. Cox models for all-cause mortality were adjusted for strategy, age, left ventricular ejection fraction, SYNTAX score, and diabetes, with anatomical and propensity-score sensitivity analyses. Secondary and subgroup analyses were exploratory. Results: Provisional and upfront two-stent strategies were intended in 145 and 89 patients. Two-stent patients had greater anatomical complexity. During median 49-month follow-up, mortality did not differ significantly (two-stent versus provisional: 16.9% versus 21.4%; p = 0.499; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.83; 95% confidence interval, 0.43–1.60; p = 0.579), with consistent sensitivity analyses. Older age, lower ejection fraction, and higher SYNTAX score were associated with mortality. Target-lesion revascularisation (7.8% versus 2.1%; p = 0.033) and in-hospital stroke (5.6% versus 0.7%; p = 0.031) were more frequent with intended two-stent PCI; other secondary outcomes did not differ significantly. Exploratory unadjusted comparisons showed lower target-lesion and target-vessel revascularisation with double-kissing crush (n = 74) versus conventional culotte (n = 15), limited by small samples and selection bias. Intravascular ultrasound was associated with lower mortality in exploratory adjusted analyses. Mortality was numerically lower with elective intra-aortic balloon pump support at ejection fraction ≤40%, without statistical significance. Conclusions: No, statistically significant association between initially intended bifurcation strategy and long-term all-cause mortality was observed. Limited precision precludes an inference of equivalence, and exploratory differences in target-lesion revascularisation and in-hospital stroke warrant caution. These findings provide a long-term real-world perspective on individualised distal LMCA PCI, integrating lesion complexity, ventricular reserve, procedural technique, and intravascular imaging.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Güven et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Distal unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) bifurcation disease (n=234). Upfront two-stent strategy vs. Provisional stenting strategy was evaluated on All-cause mortality (adjusted HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.43-1.60, p=0.579). An intended upfront two-stent strategy for left main bifurcation PCI showed no significant difference in mortality compared to provisional stenting (adjusted HR 0.83; 95% CI 0.43-1.60; p=0.579).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: