Evaluation of short-term outcome of different bifurcation stenting techniques at Assiut University Catheterization Laboratory | ||||
| Journal of Current Medical Research and Practice | ||||
| Volume 7, Issue 3, July 2022, Page 208-214 PDF (612.96 K) | ||||
| DOI: 10.4103/jcmrp.jcmrp_10_22 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
Mohamed A. Abdelhafez; Mohamed A. El-Naser Abd El-Raheem; Amr A.A. Youssef
| ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Background Coronary artery bifurcational lesions (BFLs) are a challenging branch in interventional cardiology, and their treatment is still debatable. Objectives To calculate the percentage of BFL intervention and evaluate the short-term outcome of various techniques used regarding major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) in Assiut University catheterization laboratory. Patients and methods This was an observational prospective study that was conducted from September 2017 till September 2018. Data from 60 BFL cases were reviewed and analyzed, and then the cases were divided into two groups: (a) one-stent group (provisional stenting) and (b) two-stent group; the type of technique to be used was left on the operator. The patients were scheduled for follow-up after 3 months to detect MACE. Results We had 31 patients in the provisional group and 29 patients in the two-stent group. Provisional stenting was the preferred strategy in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction cases (22.6 vs. 10.3%). Conclusion BFL stenting represented 6.5% of total percutaneous coronary intervention cases in Assiut University catheterization laboratory in 1 year, with the two-stent strategy at least as safe as provisional stenting regarding MACE during hospital stay and short-term follow-up. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| Bifurcational lesions; major adverse cardiac event; percutaneous coronary intervention; side branch; ST segment elevation myocardial infarction | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 30 PDF Download: 21 |
||||
