You are currently viewing Differential Prognostic Impact of Treatment Strategies for LM Versus Non LM Bifurcation Lesion.

Differential Prognostic Impact of Treatment Strategies for LM Versus Non LM Bifurcation Lesion.

EBC - ON DEMAND

European Bifurcation Club 2019, EBC 2019 – Barcelona, Spain

LM SESSION

Differential Prognostic Impact of Treatment Strategies for LM Versus Non LM Bifurcation Lesion. Lessons from the COBIS Registries

Author: Young Bin Song, MD, PhD, Samsung Medical Center, Korea

 

Stent Technique (1-Stent vs. 2-Stent)

The 1-stent strategy, if possible, should initially be considered the preferred approach for the treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions, especially LM bifurcation lesions.

Clinical Outcomes Between LM VS Non-LM

Patients with LM bifurcation showed significantly higher risks of target lesion failure, cardiac d eath or myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization compared to those with non-L M bifurcation.

CONCLUSION & SUMMARY

  1. Patients treated with PCI for an LM bifurcation lesion had poorer outcomes than those with a non-LM bifurcation lesion in the era of second-generation DES.
  2. In the treatment of LM bifurcation, the 2-stent strategy was associated with a higher risk of T LF than the 1-stent strategy, mainly driven by higher risk of TLR; however, incidence of cardiac death or MI was not different between the strategies, unlike previous results from the COBIS II registry.
  3. In the treatment of a non-LM bifurcation, there were no significant differences in TLF, cardiac death or MI, and TLR between the 1-stent and 2-stent strategy groups.

 

Download here

Leave a Reply