Stepwise provisional versus systematic culotte for stenting of true coronary bifurcation lesions: five-year follow-up of the multicentre randomised EBC TWO Trial.


Journal

EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology
ISSN: 1969-6213
Titre abrégé: EuroIntervention
Pays: France
ID NLM: 101251040

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
16 May 2023
Historique:
pmc-release: 17 07 2024
medline: 10 11 2023
pubmed: 10 11 2023
entrez: 10 11 2023
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

The multicentre European Bifurcation Club Trial (EBC TWO) showed no significant differences in 12-month clinical outcomes between patients randomised to a provisional stenting strategy or systematic culotte stenting in non-left main true bifurcations. This study aimed to investigate the 5-year clinical results of the EBC TWO Trial. A total of 200 patients undergoing stent implantation for non-left main bifurcation lesions were recruited into EBC TWO. Inclusion criteria required a side branch diameter ≥2.5 mm and side branch lesion length >5 mm. Five-year follow-up was completed for 197 patients. The primary endpoint was the composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularisation. The mean side branch stent diameter was 2.7±0.3 mm and mean side branch lesion length was 10.3±7.2 mm. At 5-year follow-up, the primary endpoint occurred in 18.4% of provisional and 23.7% of systematic culotte patients (hazard ratio [HR] 0.75, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.41-1.38). No significant differences were identified individually for all-cause mortality (7.8% vs 7.2%, HR 1.11, 95% CI: 0.40-3.05), myocardial infarction (8.7% vs 13.4%, HR 0.64, 95% CI: 0.27-1.50) or target vessel revascularisation (6.8% vs 9.3%, HR 1.12, 95% CI: 0.37-3.34). Stent thrombosis rates were also similar (1.9% vs 3.1%, HR 0.63, 95% CI: 0.11-3.75). There was no significant interaction between the extent of side branch disease and the primary outcome (p=0.34). In large non-left main true bifurcation lesions, the use of a systematic culotte strategy showed no benefit over provisional stenting for the composite outcome of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularisation at 5 years. The stepwise provisional approach may be considered preferable for the majority of true coronary bifurcation lesions. gov: NCT01560455.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
The multicentre European Bifurcation Club Trial (EBC TWO) showed no significant differences in 12-month clinical outcomes between patients randomised to a provisional stenting strategy or systematic culotte stenting in non-left main true bifurcations.
AIMS OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to investigate the 5-year clinical results of the EBC TWO Trial.
METHODS METHODS
A total of 200 patients undergoing stent implantation for non-left main bifurcation lesions were recruited into EBC TWO. Inclusion criteria required a side branch diameter ≥2.5 mm and side branch lesion length >5 mm. Five-year follow-up was completed for 197 patients. The primary endpoint was the composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularisation.
RESULTS RESULTS
The mean side branch stent diameter was 2.7±0.3 mm and mean side branch lesion length was 10.3±7.2 mm. At 5-year follow-up, the primary endpoint occurred in 18.4% of provisional and 23.7% of systematic culotte patients (hazard ratio [HR] 0.75, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.41-1.38). No significant differences were identified individually for all-cause mortality (7.8% vs 7.2%, HR 1.11, 95% CI: 0.40-3.05), myocardial infarction (8.7% vs 13.4%, HR 0.64, 95% CI: 0.27-1.50) or target vessel revascularisation (6.8% vs 9.3%, HR 1.12, 95% CI: 0.37-3.34). Stent thrombosis rates were also similar (1.9% vs 3.1%, HR 0.63, 95% CI: 0.11-3.75). There was no significant interaction between the extent of side branch disease and the primary outcome (p=0.34).
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
In large non-left main true bifurcation lesions, the use of a systematic culotte strategy showed no benefit over provisional stenting for the composite outcome of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularisation at 5 years. The stepwise provisional approach may be considered preferable for the majority of true coronary bifurcation lesions.
CLINICALTRIALS RESULTS
gov: NCT01560455.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37946522
pii: EIJ-D-23-00211
doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-23-00211
pmc: PMC10333921
pii:
doi:

Banques de données

ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT01560455']

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Références

J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011 Feb 22;57(8):914-20
pubmed: 21329837
Open Heart. 2020 Jan 19;7(1):e000947
pubmed: 32076558
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013 Jul 2;62(1):30-4
pubmed: 23644088
Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2017 Feb;10(2):
pubmed: 28122805
Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2016 Sep;9(9):
pubmed: 27578839
Circulation. 2010 Mar 16;121(10):1235-43
pubmed: 20194880
Eur Heart J. 2016 Jun 21;37(24):1923-8
pubmed: 27161619
EuroIntervention. 2022 Aug 19;18(6):457-470
pubmed: 35570753
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2020 Jun 22;13(12):1432-1444
pubmed: 32553331
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2000 Sep;36(3):959-69
pubmed: 10987628
BMC Med. 2010 Mar 24;8:18
pubmed: 20334633
EuroIntervention. 2019 Aug 29;15(5):465-472
pubmed: 30530401
EuroIntervention. 2015 Dec;11(8):856-9
pubmed: 26696453
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2022 Jun 27;15(12):1231-1242
pubmed: 35595676
Circulation. 2018 Jun 12;137(24):2635-2650
pubmed: 29891620
EuroIntervention. 2021 Dec 03;17(11):e910-e918
pubmed: 33970107

Auteurs

Sandeep Arunothayaraj (S)

Sussex Cardiac Centre, University Hospitals Sussex NHS Trust, Brighton, UK.

Miles W Behan (MW)

Edinburgh Heart Centre, Edinburgh, UK.

Thierry Lefèvre (T)

Institut Cardiovasculaire Paris Sud, Hôpital privé Jacques Cartier, Ramsay Santé, Massy, France.

Jens F Lassen (JF)

Department of Cardiology B, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark and University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.

Alaide Chieffo (A)

Interventional Cardiology Unit, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.

Goran Stankovic (G)

Department of Cardiology, University Clinical Centre of Serbia, Belgrade, Serbia and Faculty of Medicine, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia.

Francesco Burzotta (F)

Fondazione Policlinico A. Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.

Manuel Pan (M)

Department of Cardiology, Reina Sofia Hospital, University of Cordoba, (IMIBIC), Cordoba, Spain.

Miroslaw Ferenc (M)

University Heart Center Freiburg - Bad Krozingen, Bad Krozingen, Germany.

Thomas Hovasse (T)

Institut Cardiovasculaire Paris Sud, Hôpital privé Jacques Cartier, Ramsay Santé, Massy, France.

Mark S Spence (MS)

Department of Cardiology, Royal Victoria Hospital, Belfast, UK.

Philippe Brunel (P)

Hôpital privé Dijon Bourgogne, Clinique Valmy, Dijon, France.

James M Cotton (JM)

Royal Wolverhampton University Hospital NHS Trust, Wolverhampton, UK.

James Cockburn (J)

Sussex Cardiac Centre, University Hospitals Sussex NHS Trust, Brighton, UK.

Didier Carrié (D)

Department of Cardiology, Toulouse University, Rangueil Hospital, Toulouse, France.

Andreas Baumbach (A)

Centre for Cardiovascular Medicine and Devices, William Harvey Research Institute, Queen Mary University of London and Barts Heart Centre, London, UK.

Michael Maeng (M)

Department of Cardiology, Aarhus University Hospital & Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.

Yves Louvard (Y)

Institut Cardiovasculaire Paris Sud, Hôpital privé Jacques Cartier, Ramsay Santé, Massy, France.

David Hildick-Smith (D)

Sussex Cardiac Centre, University Hospitals Sussex NHS Trust, Brighton, UK.

Classifications MeSH