MD; for the Nordic PCI Study GroupBackground-The optimal stenting strategy in coronary artery bifurcation lesions is unknown. In the present study, a strategy of stenting both the main vessel and the side branch (MVϩSB) was compared with a strategy of stenting the main vessel only, with optional stenting of the side branch (MV), with sirolimus-eluting stents. Methods and Results-A total of 413 patients with a bifurcation lesion were randomized. The primary end point was a major adverse cardiac event: cardiac death, myocardial infarction, target-vessel revascularization, or stent thrombosis after 6 months. At 6 months, there were no significant differences in rates of major adverse cardiac events between the groups (MVϩSB 3.4%, MV 2.9%; PϭNS). In the MVϩSB group, there were significantly longer procedure and fluoroscopy times, higher contrast volumes, and higher rates of procedure-related increases in biomarkers of myocardial injury. A total of 307 patients had a quantitative coronary assessment at the index procedure and after 8 months. The combined angiographic end point of diameter stenosis Ͼ50% of main vessel and occlusion of the side branch after 8 months was found in 5.3% in the MV group and 5.1% in the MVϩSB group (PϭNS). Conclusions-Independent of stenting strategy, excellent clinical and angiographic results were obtained with percutaneous treatment of de novo coronary artery bifurcation lesions with sirolimus-eluting stents. The simple stenting strategy used in the MV group was associated with reduced procedure and fluoroscopy times and lower rates of procedure-related biomarker elevation. Therefore, this strategy can be recommended as the routine bifurcation stenting technique.

MD; for the Nordic-Baltic PCI Study GroupBackground-It is unknown whether the preferred 1-stent bifurcation stenting approach with stenting of the main vessel (MV) and optional side branch stenting using drug-eluting stents should be finalized by a kissing balloon dilatation (FKBD). Therefore, we compared strategies of MV stenting with and without FKBD. Methods and Results-We randomized 477 patients with a bifurcation lesion to FKBD (nϭ238) or no FKBD (nϭ239) after MV stenting. The primary end point was major adverse cardiac events: cardiac death, non-procedure-related index lesion myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization, or stent thrombosis within 6 months. The 6-month major adverse cardiac event rates were 2.1% and 2.5% (Pϭ1.00) in the FKBD and no-FKBD groups, respectively. Procedure and fluoroscopy times were longer and more contrast media was needed in the FKBD group than in the no-FKBD group. Three hundred twenty-six patients had a quantitative coronary assessment. At 8 months, the rate of binary (re)stenosis in the entire bifurcation lesion (MV and side branch) was 11.0% versus 17.3% (Pϭ0.11), in the MV was 3.1% versus 2.5% (Pϭ0.68), and in the side branch was 7.9% versus 15.4% (Pϭ0.039) in the FKBD versus no-FKBD groups, respectively. In patients with true bifurcation lesions, the side branch restenosis rate was 7.6% versus 20.0% (Pϭ0.024) in the FKBD and no-FKBD groups, respectively. Conclusions-MV

Background-In a number of coronary bifurcation lesions, both the main vessel and the side branch need stent coverage.Using sirolimus eluting stents, we compared 2 dedicated bifurcation stent techniques, the crush and the culotte techniques in a randomized trial with separate clinical and angiographic end-points. Methods and Results-A total of 424 patients with a bifurcation lesion were randomized to crush (nϭ209) and culotte (nϭ215) stenting. The primary end point was major adverse cardiac events; cardiac death, myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization, or stent thrombosis after 6 months. At 6 months there were no significant differences in major adverse cardiac event rates between the groups; crush 4.3%, culotte 3.7% (Pϭ0.87). Procedure and fluoroscopy times and contrast volumes were similar in the 2 groups. The rates of procedure-related increase in biomarkers of myocardial injury were 15.5% in crush versus 8.8% in culotte group (Pϭ0.08). A total of 324 patients had a quantitative coronary assessment at the index procedure and after 8 months. The angiographic end-points of in-segment and in-stent restenosis of main vessel and/or side branch after 8 months were found in 12.1% versus 6.6% (Pϭ0.10) and in 10.5% versus 4.5% (Pϭ0.046) in the crush and culotte groups, respectively. Conclusions-Both the crush and the culotte bifurcation stenting techniques were associated with similar and excellent clinical and angiographic results. Angiographically, there was a trend toward less in-segment restenosis and significantly reduced in-stent restenosis following culotte stenting. (Circ Cardiovasc Intervent. 2009;2:27-34.)

At 5-year follow-up in the Nordic Bifurcation Study, the clinical outcomes after simple optional side branch stenting remained at least equal to the more complex strategy of planned stenting of both the main vessel and the side branch.

At 36-month follow-up, the clinical outcomes were similar for patients with coronary bifurcation lesions treated with the culotte or the crush stent technique. (Nordic Bifurcation Study. How to Use Drug Eluting Stents [DES] in Bifurcation Lesions? NCT00376571).