Stenting techniques for coronary bifurcation lesions: Evidence from a network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

DK-Crush or Mini-Crush Stenting for Complex Left Main Bifurcation Lesions: The Multicenter EVOLUTE-CRUSH LM Registry

BACKGROUND

The comparison of outcomes of mini-crush (MCT) versus double kissing crush (DKC) techniques for complex left main bifurcation (LMB) lesions is still lacking. This investigation aimed to assess the long-term outcomes of patients who underwent MCT or DKC for LMB disease.

METHODS

From 2014 to 2024, patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention for complex LMB lesions were retrospectively collected. The primary end point was major adverse cardiac events as the combination of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically driven target lesion revascularization during follow-up. The secondary end point was measured as major adverse cardiovascular and cerebral events including all-cause death, target vessel revascularization, target vessel myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, and stroke.

RESULTS

This large-scale multicenter (n=13) observational study included a total of 531 consecutive patients (men: 405 [76.3%], mean age: 63.16±11.26 years) with complex LMB lesions who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention. The initial revascularization strategy was MCT in 313 (59%) patients and DKC in 218 (41%) patients. The number of balloons used (5.91±1.53 versus 6.72±1.70, P<0.001) and procedure time (66.60±24.20 versus 72.97±19.97 minutes, P<0.001) were notably lower in the MCT group. In the overall population, the long-term major adverse cardiac events (hazard ratio [HR], 0.704; P=0.169) and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebral events (HR, 0.660; P=0.079) did not differ in individuals with complex LMB lesions treated with MCT and DKC. Other end points were also comparable between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In complex LMB lesions, risk-adjusted major adverse cardiac events and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebral events rates were comparable between both techniques, with a nonsignificant trend favoring DKC at long-term follow-up.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique Identifier: NCT06546748.

Mini-crush or Nano-crush Stenting Technique for Complex Coronary Bifurcation Lesions: the Multicenter MINANO Registry

BACKGROUND

In this multicenter study we aimed to retrospectively identify the midterm clinical outcomes of the mini-crush technique (MCT) and nano-crush technique (NCT) in patients with complex bifurcation lesions (CBLs).

METHODS

The study included 431 patients (318 men [73.8%], mean age 60.96 ± 10.34 years) from 6 tertiary centers who underwent bifurcation percutaneous coronary intervention between January 2018 and December 2023. The primary endpoint was defined as the major cardiovascular events (MACEs) of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction (TVMI), or clinically driven target lesion revascularization (TLR). To our knowledge, this study is the first to compare clinical outcomes of the MCT and NCT in patients with CBLs.

RESULTS

The initial revascularization strategy was MCT in 302 (70%) patients and NCT in 129 (30%) patients. SYNTAX scores (24.33 ± 6.54 vs 24.43 ± 5.45, P = 0.707) were comparable between groups. MACEs (18.6% vs 10.9%, P = 0.031), TVMIs (11.6% vs 5.6%, P = 0.030), and clinically driven TLRs (14% vs 6%, P = 0.006) were significantly more prevalent in the NCT group than in the MCT group. Being in the MCT group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.549, P = 0.035), high SYNTAX score (HR 1.105, P < 0.001), nonfatal intraprocedural complications (HR 3.269, P < 0.001), proximal side-branch optimization (HR 0.451, P = 0.013), diabetes mellitus (HR 2.263, P = 0.009), and chronic kidney disease (HR 1.948, P = 0.024) were found to be independent predictors of MACEs.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this nonrandomized study suggest that the MCT was associated with better midterm MACE, TVMI, and clinically driven TLR rates compared with NCT in patients with CBLs.

Long-term cardiovascular outcomes after mini-crush or T and minimal protrusion techniques in complex bifurcation lesions: the EVOLUTE-CRUSH III study

BACKGROUND

Mini-crush (MC) and T-stenting and small protrusion (TAP) techniques are frequently used, but the long-term comparison of both techniques in patients with complex bifurcation lesions (CBLs) is still a debatable issue. This study sought to retrospectively evaluate the long-term outcomes of MC and TAP techniques in patients with CBLs.

METHODS

A total of 271 patients [male: 202 (78.9%), mean age: 58.90 ± 10.11 years] patients in whom complex bifurcation intervention was performed between 2014 and 2023 were involved. The primary endpoint was major cardiovascular events (MACE) as the combination of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically driven-target lesion revascularization. The Cox proportional hazard models were adjusted by the inverse probability weighting approach to reduce treatment selection bias.

RESULTS

The initial management strategy was MC in 146 patients and TAP in 125 cases. MACE occurred in 52 patients (19.2%) during a mean follow-up period of 32.43 ± 16 months. The incidence of MACE (13 vs. 26.4%, P  = 0.005) and major cardiovascular and cerebral events (15.1 vs. 28.8%, P  = 0.006) were significantly lower in the MC group than in the TAP group. Additionally, the incidence of definite or probable stent thrombosis was numerically lower in the MC group compared with the TAP group but did not differ significantly (2.7 vs. 8%, P  = 0.059). The long-term MACE was notably higher in the TAP group than the MC group [adjusted hazard ratio (inverse probability weighted): 1.936 (95% confidence interval: 1.053-3.561), P  = 0.033].

CONCLUSION

In this study involving patients with CBLs, percutaneous coronary intervention with the MC technique had better long-term outcomes than the TAP technique.

Necessity sequential intermediate kissing balloon dilation for crush stenting: Further insights from metal/polymer vessel scaffolds bench testing

Sequential intermediate kissing balloon dilation (sIKBD) is crucial for crush stenting, but it require appropriate procedure remains unclear for crush stenting. This study aims to investigate whether sIKBD is necessary and how it can be properly performed during crush stenting. Mini-crush stenting (mini-CS) and sIKBD for mini-crush stenting (sIKBD-mini-CS) using metal drug-eluting stents/polymer bioresorbable vessel scaffolds (mDES/pBVS) were emulated in bifurcation models considering the branch diameter difference, and sIKBD was added to mini-CS for pretreating side-branch (SB) stent before main-branch (MB) stenting (second figure), respectively. Micro-computed tomography was used to assess the morphological parameters of bifurcated stents including length of overlapping stent segment, residual ostial stenosis of the SB, and neocarina length using quantitative methods. Further, optical coherence tomography was to analyze the incidence of stent malapposition. Quantitative analysis demonstrated that in mDES/pBVS phantom, the neocarina length (mDES: 0.45 ± 0.10 mm vs 0.30 ± 0.09 mm, P = .005; pBVS: 0.47 ± 0.11 mm vs 0.29 ± 0.09 mm, P = .001), residual ostial stenosis at the SB (mDES: 19.37 ± 8.21% vs 12.47 ± 2.05%, P = .001; pBVS: 21.89 ± 8.54% vs 9.98 ± 3.35%, P = .035), and stent malapposition in the overlapping segment (mDES: 10.29 ± 3.31% vs 3.83 ± 0.97%, P = .001; pBVS: 12.05 ± 3.87% vs 6.40 ± 1.59%, P = .003) were lower in the sIKBD-mini-CS group than those in the mini-CS group (P < .05 for all). The results of factorial analysis showed that mDES platform tended to have better morphological indicators than the pBVS platform. Adding the sIKBD to mini-CS showed better morphologic characteristics of mDES/pBVS phantoms when compared with mini-CS. Therefore, it should be considered as a critical and proper technique for crush stenting.

Long-term outcomes following double kissing crush or mini-culotte stenting for complex coronary bifurcation lesions: the EVOLUTE-CRUSH IV study

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the long-term outcomes of double kissing crush stenting (DKC) and mini-culotte technique (MCT) in patients with complex bifurcation lesions.

METHODS

This retrospective study enrolled 236 patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for complex coronary bifurcation disease between January 2014 and November 2022. The primary endpoint was target lesion failure (TLF), defined as the combination of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), or clinically driven target lesion revascularization (TLR). The secondary endpoint was major cardiovascular and cerebral events (MACCE) including all-cause death, MI, TLR, stroke, or stent thrombosis. The regression models were adjusted by applying the inverse probability weighted (IPW) approach to reduce treatment selection bias.

RESULTS

The initial management strategy was DKC in 154 (65.3%) patients and MCT in 82 (34.7%) patients (male: 194 [82.2%], mean age: 60.85 ± 10.86 years). The SYNTAX scores were similar in both groups. The rates of long-term TLF and MACCE rates were 17.4% and 20%, respectively. The rate of TLF (26.8% vs. 12.3%, p = 0.005) was higher in patients treated with MCT than those treated with the DKC technique, mainly driven by more frequent TLR (15.9% vs. 7.1%, p = 0.035). The long-term TLF and MACCE rates were notably lower in the DKC group compared to the others: adjusted hazard ratio (HR; IPW): 0.407, p = 0.009 for TLF, and adjusted HR(IPW): 0.391 [95% CI: 0.209-0.730], p = 0.003 for MACCE.

CONCLUSION

At long-term follow-up, the rates of TLF and MACCE were 17.4% and 20%, respectively. However, long-term TLF was significantly higher in patients treated with MCT than those treated with the DKC technique, primarily due to a more frequent occurrence of clinically driven TLR.

Cardiovascular outcomes of complex bifurcation lesions following double kissing crush or nano-crush techniques: The multicenter EVOLUTE-CRUSH V study

BACKGROUND

Double 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).

METHODS

A 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.

RESULTS

The 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).

CONCLUSION

In patients with CBLs, applying the DKC technique for bifurcation treatment had better ischemia-driven outcomes than the NC technique.

Five-year outcomes of double kissing mini-culotte stenting vs. mini-culotte stenting using drug-eluting stents for the treatment of true coronary bifurcation lesions

Objective

This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of double kissing mini-culotte (DKMC) stenting with those of mini-culotte (MC) stenting in treating patients with true coronary bifurcation lesions (CBLs) in the clinical real world.

Methods

This retrospective observational cohort study included 180 consecutive patients with true CBLs (Medina type 1,1,1; 1,0,1; 0,1,1). All eligible patients underwent coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention with two-stent techniques in our hospital; among them, 97 received DKMC treatment and 83 MC treatment. The primary clinical endpoints were the major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), which included cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and target vessel/lesion revascularization (TVR/TLR). The secondary endpoints were stent thrombosis, in-stent restenosis, and individual components of MACE.

Results

Quantitative coronary angiography analysis (at 5 years) revealed that late lumen loss (0.25 ± 0.41 mm vs. 0.14 ± 0.32 mm, P = 0.032) and segmental diameter restenosis of the side branch (27.84 ± 12.34% vs. 19.23 ± 9.76%, P = 0.016) were lower in the DKMC treatment group than that in the MC treatment group. Notably, compared to that in the MC treatment group, the cumulative event rate of MACE at 5 years (22.8% vs. 8.3%, P = 0.007) and TVR/TLR (17.7% vs. 6.3%, P = 0.018) was higher in the DKMC treatment group, driven mainly by TVR/TLR. Especially, the DKMC group was related to a significant reduction in the primary and secondary endpoints in high-risk patients.

Conclusion

DKMC treatment was associated with less late lumen loss and restenosis in the side branch and a lower rate of cumulative MACE and TVR/TLR. DKMC treatment is more effective for treating true CBLs than MC treatment; however, these findings warrant further confirmation through a randomized clinical trial.

Acute and long-term results of percutaneous coronary intervention of bifurcation lesions with the dedicated Bioss Lim C stent: the Italian BIfurcation Observational Spontaneous Study (IBIOSS)

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for bifurcation lesions still represents a clinical challenge. The Bioss Lim C is a dedicated device for bifurcation lesions, features a tapered shape and large cells, and thus appears as a promising adjunct to the current interventional cardiologists' armamentarium. We aimed at conducting a prospective multicenter study focusing on early and long-term results after Bioss Lim C implantation for true coronary bifurcation lesions.

METHODS

Patients with true bifurcation lesions in whom Bioss Lim C implantation was attempted were enrolled in four Italian centers. An explicit bifurcation management approach was recommended, leaving however the choice between one- vs. two-stent strategies at operator's discretion. Acute and long-term results were systematically appraised, focusing on an acute composite of complex side branch (SB) rewiring, SB pinching, or SB occlusion (primary efficacy endpoint), as well as major adverse events (MACE, i.e. death, myocardial infarction [MI], or target vessel revascularization [TVR]), individual components of MACE, and stent thrombosis.

RESULTS

A total of 207 patients were included, with age of 67.3±10.8 years, and 40 (19.3%) women. The target lesion was located in the left main in 48 (23.2%) patients, whereas proximal reference vessel diameter was 3.69±0.48 mm, and lesion length 20.3±3.4 mm. According to the Medina classification, most patients (60 [30.9%]) had 1-1-1 lesions. Drug-eluting stent implantation in the SB was carried out in 19 (9.3%) subjects, and kissing balloon inflation was used in 67 (32.5%). The primary efficacy endpoint occurred in 27 (13.0%), with side branch (SB) occlusion in two (1.0%), SB pinching in 23 (11.1%), and complex SB rewiring in six (2.9%), and was most frequent in patients with lower body mass index or dyslipidemia. After 24.1±19.5 months, MACE were adjudicated in 23 (11.1%) subjects, with death in 10 (4.8%), MI in six (2.9%), and TVR in seven (3.4%), as well as stent thrombosis in one (0.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

This study supports a wider adoption of the Bioss Lim C dedicated bifurcation device, thanks to the favorable acute results as well as long-term clinical outcomes, as well as its versatility for the stenting strategy provisionally or eventually adopted by operators.

A Bayesian meta-analysis of double kissing (DK) crush or provisional stenting for coronary artery bifurcation lesions

OBJECTIVE

Despite the development of dedicated, two-stent strategies, including the double kissing (DK) crush technique, the ideal technique for coronary artery bifurcation stenting has not been identified. We aimed to compare and determine the absolute risk difference (ARD) of the DK crush technique alone versus provisional stenting approaches for coronary bifurcation lesions, using the Bayesian technique.

METHOD

We queried PubMed/MEDLINE to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared DK crush technique with provisional stenting for bifurcation lesions, published till January 2023. We used Bayesian methods to calculate the ARD and 95% credible interval (CrI).

RESULTS

We included three RCTs, with 916 patients, in the final analysis. The ARD of cardiac death was centered at -0.01 (95% CrI: -0.04 to 0.02; Tau: 0.02, 85% probability of ARD of DK crush vs. provisional stenting <0). ARD for myocardial infarction was centered at -0.03 (95%CrI: -0.9 to 0.03; Tau: 0.05, 87% probability of ARD of DK crush vs. provisional stenting <0). ARD for stent thrombosis was centered at 0.00 (95% CrI: -0.04 to 0.03, Tau: 0.03, 51% probability of ARD for DK crush vs. provisional stenting <0). Finally, ARD for target lesion revascularization was centered at -0.05 (95% CrI: -0.08 to -0.03, Tau: 0.02, 99.97% probability of ARD for DK crush vs. provisional stenting <0).

CONCLUSIONS

Bayesian analysis demonstrated a lower probability of cardiac death, myocardial infarction and target lesion revascularization, with DK crush compared with provisional stenting techniques, and a minimal probability of difference in stent thrombosis.

Cardiovascular Outcomes After Mini-Crush or Double Kissing Crush Stenting Techniques for Complex Bifurcation Lesions: The EVOLUTE-CRUSH Registry

Comparison of clinical outcomes of double kissing crush (DKC) and mini-crush (MC) techniques in patients with complex coronary bifurcation lesions is lacking. This study sought to determine the clinical results of DKC and MC stenting techniques in mid-term follow-up. This retrospective study included a total of 269 consecutive patients with complex bifurcation lesions who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention; 132 (49%) of them were treated with MC technique, whereas 137 (51%) treated with DKC technique. The primary end point was target lesion failure (TLF), defined as the combination of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically driven target lesion revascularization. This is the first study to compare the cardiovascular outcomes of DKC and MC stenting techniques in patients with complex bifurcation lesions. The SYNTAX scores were similar in both groups (23 [20 to 30] vs 23 [19 to 28], p = 0.631)]. The number of balloons (6.31 ± 1.80 vs 4.42 ± 0.87, p <0.001) and guidewires (3.55 ± 0.83 vs 2.86 ± 0.74, p <0.001) used, fluoroscopy time (21.55 ± 7.05 vs 16.66 ± 4.19 minutes, p <0.001), and procedure time (80.42 ± 27.95 vs 69.61 ± 18.97 minutes, p <0.001) were significantly higher in the DKC group. The rate of composite TLF was similar in complex bifurcation patients treated with MC than those treated with the DKC technique (14% vs 12%, p = 0.453). Moreover, both groups had similar rates in terms of cardiac death or all-cause death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, clinically driven target lesion revascularization, and stent thrombosis. In conclusion, the present study showed that both techniques of bifurcation treatment met high angiographic success with low complication and similar TLF rates.

Clinical outcomes following different stenting techniques for coronary bifurcation lesions: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Controversy still exists regarding the optimal treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions.

AIMS

We aimed to analyse the evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to compare outcomes following different bifurcation stenting techniques.

METHODS

We systematically searched for RCTs comparing different techniques published up to July 2022. We then conducted a pairwise meta-analysis to compare outcomes between provisional stenting (PS) versus upfront 2-stent techniques. Moreover, we performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare all strategies with each other. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE).

RESULTS

Twenty-four RCTs (6,890 patients) analysed PS, T-stenting, double-kissing (DK)-crush, crush, or culotte stenting. The pairwise meta-analysis did not reveal a significant difference between the PS and 2-stent techniques. However, the prespecified sensitivity analysis, which included RCTs exclusively enrolling patients with true bifurcation lesions, showed a lower rate of MACE following 2-stent techniques, and meta-regression indicated that a longer side branch lesion was associated with a greater benefit from the 2-stent strategy, which was the most apparent in RCTs with a mean lesion length >11 mm. NMA revealed that DK-crush was associated with the lowest MACE rate (odds ratio 0.47, 95% confidence interval: 0.36-0.62; p<0.01; PS as a reference).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, 2-stent techniques were not significantly better than PS in terms of clinical outcomes. However, the results of the sensitivity analysis suggested that there might be a benefit of a 2-stent approach in selected patients with true bifurcation lesions, especially in the case of long side branch lesions. An NMA revealed that DK-crush was associated with the lowest event rates when compared with other techniques.

An Approach to Non-left Main Bifurcation Lesions: A Contemporary Review

Bifurcated anatomical locations in the arterial tree, such as coronary artery bifurcations, are prone to develop obstructive atherosclerotic lesions due to the pro-atherogenic low wall shear stress. The percutaneous treatment of bifurcation lesions is among the most challenging complex coronary interventions, including different multistep stenting strategies. Even though provisional side branch (SB) stenting is recommended as the primary approach in most cases, the debate continues between provisional SB and upfront two-stent strategies, particularly in complex bifurcations consisting of a significantly diseased SB that supplies a crucial myocardial territory. This review will highlight the importance of understanding the bifurcation philosophy and provide an individual algorithmic approach to find the optimal treatment strategy for each patient with a non-left main coronary bifurcation lesion. Considering the most recent scientific evidence, the advantages and disadvantages of each stenting technique and the role of intracoronary imaging to optimize bifurcation percutaneous coronary intervention outcomes will be discussed.

[Bifurcation lesions : Are new strategies and devices needed?]

Interventional treatment of bifurcation lesions, especially true complex bifurcation lesions, continue to be a challenge for interventional cardiologists. A primary one stent strategy is always preferred for simple bifurcation lesions, whereas studies in recent years have shown that a two stent strategy may be advantageous for true bifurcations, i.e. those involving at least the distal main branch as well as the side branch. This seems to be even more pronounced when the lesion presents as complex, i.e., the side branch shows high-grade stenosis over longer stretches and the complete lesion fulfils certain criteria, e.g., severe calcification and a bifurcation angle < 45° or > 70°. According to the latest randomized trials and meta-analyses, the double kissing (DK) crush and double kissing mini-crush (DKMC) techniques in particular seem to be advantageous for these lesions; however, in recent years the established techniques have been continuously refined and further developed. The DK culotte technique and the nano-crush technique deserve special attention. Both techniques seem to further improve and simplify the existing underlying strategies; however, further studies to prove the superiority of these techniques over the established ones are still pending. Overall, the implementation of the available randomized study results, the further development of the techniques and also of the materials can continuously improve the outcome of the patients after interventional treatment of bifurcation lesions. This is also confirmed by the latest registry data, which for the first time could show equal event rates in patients after treatment of complex lesions compared to simple lesions in the clinical practice.

The Contemporary Management of Left Main Coronary Artery Disease

The 'gold standard' in the management of left main coronary artery disease has historically been coronary artery bypass surgery. Recent innovations in drug-eluting stent technology coupled with the increasing utility of physiology and imaging guidance for procedures have led to an evolving role of percutaneous coronary intervention in left main disease of low and intermediate anatomical complexity. This revascularization modality carries the clear advantage of being less invasive and significantly reduced recovery times. This practice is currently supported by international guidelines, however, it remains a controversial topic in the field of interventional cardiology, and the long-term outcomes of a percutaneous strategy have been questioned. This review describes the current evidence base for the assessment and choice of intervention in left main coronary artery disease. The percutaneous revascularization techniques and use of imaging to optimize procedures and improve clinical outcomes have been discussed.

Randomized non-inferiority TrIal comParing reverse T And Protrusion versus double-kissing and crush Stenting for the treatment of complex left main bifurcation lesions

BACKGROUND

The treatment of left main bifurcation stenoses remains challenging.

AIMS

We compare the "Reverse T and Protrusion" (reverse-TAP) technique to Double-Kissing and crush (DK-crush).

METHODS

The study was designed as non-inferiority trial, the primary endpoint was percentage stent expansion in the ostial side branch at optical coherence tomography.

RESULTS

52 consecutive patients (13 females, 17 diabetics, Syntax score 25 [22-29]) with complex coronary bifurcation lesions of the left main were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to Reverse-TAP or DK-crush stenting. The intervention was performed according to protocol in all patients in both randomization groups. Side branch stent expansion was 75 [67-90]% in the DK-crush group and 86 [75-95]% in the reverse-TAP group (one-sided 97.5% lower parametric confidence interval: - 0.28%; P < 0.01 for non-inferiority; P = 0.037 for superiority). Side branch balloon pressure during final kissing was higher in the DK-crush group (14 [12-16] vs. reverse-TAP: 13 [12-14]; P = 0.043). Procedural time was shorter with reverse-TAP (DK-crush: 32 [24-44] min vs reverse-TAP: 25 [22-33] min; P = 0.044). Other procedural parameters were not different between groups. There was no difference in any of the safety endpoints up to 1 month.

CONCLUSIONS

A reverse-TAP strategy for the interventional treatment of complex coronary lesions was non-inferior and superior to DK-crush for the primary endpoint side branch expansion while requiring less time. A larger study testing long-term clinical outcomes is warranted.

TRAIL REGISTRATION

NCT: NCT03714750.