The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Randomized trial of simple versus complex drug-eluting stenting for bifurcation lesions: the British Bifurcation Coronary Study: old, new, and evolving strategies

Record type: Article

Background— The optimal strategy for treating coronary bifurcation lesions remains a subject of debate. With bare-metal stents, single-stent approaches appear to be superior to systematic 2-stent strategies. Drug-eluting stents, however, have low rates of restenosis and might offer improved outcomes with complex stenting techniques.

Methods and Results— Patients with significant coronary bifurcation lesions were randomized to either a simple or complex stenting strategy with drug-eluting stents. In the simple strategy, the main vessel was stented, followed by optional kissing balloon dilatation/T-stent. In the complex strategy, both vessels were systematically stented (culotte or crush techniques) with mandatory kissing balloon dilatation. Five hundred patients 64±10 years old were randomized; 77% were male. Eighty-two percent of lesions were true bifurcations (>50% narrowing in both vessels). In the simple group (n=250), 66 patients (26%) had kissing balloons in addition to main-vessel stenting, and 7 (3%) had T stenting. In the complex group (n=250), 89% of culotte (n=75) and 72% of crush (n=169) cases were completed successfully with final kissing balloon inflations. The primary end point (a composite at 9 months of death, myocardial infarction, and target-vessel failure) occurred in 8.0% of the simple group versus 15.2% of the complex group (hazard ratio 2.02, 95% confidence interval 1.17 to 3.47, P=0.009). Myocardial infarction occurred in 3.6% versus 11.2%, respectively (P=0.001), and in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events occurred in 2.0% versus 8.0% (P=0.002), respectively. Procedure duration and x-ray dose favored the simple approach.

Conclusions— When coronary bifurcation lesions are treated, a systematic 2-stent technique results in higher rates of in-hospital and 9-month major adverse cardiovascular events. This difference is largely driven by periprocedural myocardial infarction. Procedure duration is longer, and x-ray dose is higher. The provisional technique should remain the preferred strategy in the majority of cases.

Clinical Trial Registration Information— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT 00351260.

Full text not available from this repository.

Citation

Hildick-Smith, David, De Belder, Adam J., Cooter, Nina, Curzen, Nicholas P., Clayton, Tim C., Oldroyd, Keith G., Bennett, Lorraine, Holmberg, Steve, Cotton, James M, Glennon, Peter E., Thomas, Martyn R., Maccarthy, Phillip A., Baumback, Andreas, Mulvihill, Niall T., Henderson, Robert A., Redwood, Simon R., Starkey, Ian R. and Stables, Rodney H. (2010) Randomized trial of simple versus complex drug-eluting stenting for bifurcation lesions: the British Bifurcation Coronary Study: old, new, and evolving strategies Circulation, 121, (10), pp. 1235-1243. (doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.109.888297). (PMID:20194880).

More information

Published date: 2010
Keywords: coronary disease, bifurcation, stents, angioplasty

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 183245
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/183245
ISSN: 0009-7322
PURE UUID: 0e49eaae-50b8-4993-8f65-5ad4b85de7a4

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 03 May 2011 08:45
Last modified: 18 Jul 2017 11:55

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: David Hildick-Smith
Author: Adam J. De Belder
Author: Nina Cooter
Author: Tim C. Clayton
Author: Keith G. Oldroyd
Author: Lorraine Bennett
Author: Steve Holmberg
Author: James M Cotton
Author: Peter E. Glennon
Author: Martyn R. Thomas
Author: Phillip A. Maccarthy
Author: Andreas Baumback
Author: Niall T. Mulvihill
Author: Robert A. Henderson
Author: Simon R. Redwood
Author: Ian R. Starkey
Author: Rodney H. Stables

University divisions


Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×