Affiliation:
1. Department of Cardiology Istanbul Mehmet Akif Ersoy Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery Training and Research Hospital Istanbul Turkey
2. Department of Cardiology Koşuyolu Kartal Heart Training & Research Hospital Istanbul Turkey
3. Department of Cardiology Basaksehir Cam & Sakura City Hospital Istanbul Turkey
4. Department of Cardiology Şişli Hamidiye Etfal Training and Research Hospital Istanbul Turkey
5. Department of Cardiology Ankara Etlik City Hospital Ankara Turkey
Abstract
AbstractBackgroundDouble kissing crush (DKC) and nano‐crush (NC) techniques are frequently used, but the comparison for both techniques is still lacking. The goal of this multicenter study was to retrospectively assess the midterm clinical results of DKC and NC stenting in patients with complex bifurcation lesions (CBLs).MethodsA total of 324 consecutive patients [male: 245 (75.6%), mean age: 60.73 ± 10.21 years] who underwent bifurcation percutaneous coronary intervention between January 2019 and May 2023 were included. The primary endpoint defined as the major cardiovascular events (MACE) included cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction (TVMI), or clinically driven target lesion revascularization (TLR). Inverse probability weighting (IPW) was performed to reduce treatment selection bias. This is the first report comparing the clinical outcomes of DKC and NC stenting in patients with CBL.ResultsThe initial revascularization strategy was DKC in 216 (66.7%) cases and NC in 108 (33.3%) patients. SYNTAX scores [25.5 ± 6.73 vs. 23.32 ± 6.22, p = 0.005] were notably higher in the NC group than the DKC group. The procedure time (76.98 ± 25.1 vs. 57.5 ± 22.99 min, p = 0.001) was notably higher in the DKC group. The incidence of MACE (18.5 vs. 9.7%, p = 0.025), clinically driven TLR (14.8 vs. 6%, p = 0.009), and TVMI (10.2 vs. 4.2%, p = 0.048) were notably higher in the NC group than in the DKC group. The midterm MACE rate in the overall population notably differed between the NC group and the DKC group (adjusted HR (IPW): 2.712, [95% CI: 1.407−5.228], p = 0.003).ConclusionIn patients with CBLs, applying the DKC technique for bifurcation treatment had better ischemia‐driven outcomes than the NC technique.