Login / Signup

One Versus Two Stents Strategies for Unprotected Left Main Intervention: Gulf Left Main Registry.

Abdulaziz AlasmariMina IskandarAmin DaoulahAhmad S HersiMohammed AlshehriAlwaleed AljoharTurki Al GarniReda AbuelattaNooraldaem YousifWael AlmahmeedHameedullah M KazimWael A RefaatEhab SelimBadr AlzahraniAbdulrahman H AlqahtaniMohamed Ajaz GhaniHaitham AminShahrukh HashmaniOsama El-SayedAhmed JamjoomWilliam T HurleyZiad DahdouhJairam AithalOsama AhmadMohamed RamadanAhmed M IbrahimAbdelmaksoud ElganadyMohammed A QutubMohamed N AlamaAbdulwali AbohasanTaher HassanMohammed BalghithIssam AltnjiAdnan Fathey HussienIbrahim A M AbdulhabeebWael QenawiAhmed ShawkyAhmed A GhonimAhmed Farid ElmahroukNiranjan HiremathMaryam Jameel NaserAbeer M ShawkyAmir Lotfi
Published in: Angiology (2022)
The optimal stenting strategy for unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) disease remains debated. This retrospective observational study (Gulf Left Main Registry) analyzed the outcomes of 1 vs 2 stents in patients with unprotected left main percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Overall, 1222 patients were evaluated; 173 had 1 stent and 1049 had 2 stents. The 2-stent group was older with more comorbidities, higher mean SYNTAX scores, and more distal bifurcation lesions. In the 1-stent group, in-hospital events were significant for major bleeding, and better mean creatinine clearance. At median follow-up of 20 months, the 1-stent group was more likely to have target lesion revascularization (TLR). Total mortality was numerically lower in the 1-stent group (.00% vs 2.10%); however, this was not statistically significant ( P =.068). Our analysis demonstrates the benefits of a 2-stent approach for ULMCA patients with high SYNTAX scores and lesions in both major side branches, while the potential benefit of a 1-stent approach for less complex ULMCA was also observed. Further studies with longer follow-up are needed to definitively demonstrate the optimal approach.
Keyphrases