Affiliation:
1. Keele Cardiovascular Research Group, Centre for Prognosis Research, Institutes of Applied Clinical Science and Primary Care and Health Sciences Keele University Newcastle United Kingdom
2. Institute of Health Informatics University College London London United Kingdom
3. Department of Interventional Cardiology and Endovascular Therapeutics Instituto Cardiovascular de Buenos Aires Buenos Aires Argentina
4. Department of Cardiology Hillel Yaffe Medical Center Hadera Israel
5. Albert Schweitzer Ziekenhuis Dordrecht the Netherlands
6. Cardiology Department Amphia Hospital Breda Breda the Netherlands
7. Worcestershire Royal Hospital Worcester United Kingdom
8. Medical and Clinical Division Terumo Europe NV Leuven Belgium
9. Division of Cardiology University Hospitals Geneva Switzerland
Abstract
Background
Coronary bifurcation lesions (CBLs) are frequently encountered in clinical practice and are associated with worse outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention. However, there are limited data around the prognostic impact of different CBL distributions.
Methods and Results
All CBL percutaneous coronary intervention procedures from the prospective e‐Ultimaster (Prospective, Single‐Arm, Multi Centre Observations Ultimaster Des Registry) multicenter international registry were analyzed according to CBL distribution as defined by the Medina classification. Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare the hazard ratio (HR) of the primary outcome, 1‐year target lesion failure (composite of cardiac death, target vessel–related myocardial infarction, and clinically driven target lesion revascularization), and its individual components between Medina subtypes using Medina 1.0.0 as the reference category. A total of 4003 CBL procedures were included. The most prevalent Medina subtypes were 1.1.1 (35.5%) and 1.1.0 (26.8%), whereas the least prevalent was 0.0.1 (3.5%). Overall, there were no significant differences in patient and procedural characteristics among Medina subtypes. Only Medina 1.1.1 and 0.0.1 subtypes were associated with increased target lesion failure (HR, 2.6 [95% CI, 1.3–5.5] and HR, 4.0 [95% CI, 1.6–9.0], respectively) at 1 year, compared with Medina 1.0.0, prompted by clinically driven target lesion revascularization (HR, 3.1 [95% CI, 1.1–8.6] and HR, 4.6 [95% CI, 1.3–16.0], respectively) as well as cardiac death in Medina 0.0.1 (HR, 4.7 [95% CI, 1.0–21.6]). No differences in secondary outcomes were observed between Medina subtypes.
Conclusions
In a large multicenter registry analysis of coronary bifurcation percutaneous coronary intervention procedures, we demonstrate prognostic differences in 1‐year outcomes between different CBL distributions, with Medina 1.1.1 and 0.0.1 subtypes associated with an increased risk of target lesion failure.
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Subject
Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
Cited by
11 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献