Trans-radial versus trans-femoral intervention for the treatment of coronary bifurcations

Results from coronary bifurcation stenting registry

Seungmin Chung, Sung Ho Her, Pil Sang Song, Young Bin Song, Joo Yong Hahn, Jin Ho Choi, Sang Hoon Lee, Yangsoo Jang, Junghan Yoon, Seung Jea Tahk, Seung Jung Park, Seung Hyuk Choi, Ki Bae Seung, Hyeon Cheol Gwon

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Trans-radial (TR) approach is increasingly recognized as an alternative to the routine use of trans-femoral (TF) approach. However, there are limited data comparing the outcomes of these two approaches for the treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions. We evaluated outcomes ofTR and TF percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) in this complex lesion. Procedural outcomes and clinical events were compared in 1,668 patients who underwent PCI for non-left main bifurcation lesions, according to the vascular approach, either TR (n = 503) or TF (n = 1,165). The primary outcome was major adverse cardiac events (MACE), including cardiac death, myocardialinfarction (MI), and target lesion revascularization (TLR) in all patients and in 424 propensity-score matched pairs of patients. There were no significant differences between TR and TF approaches for procedural success in the main vessel (99.6% vs 98.6%, P = 0.08) and side branches (62.6% vs 66.7%, P = 0.11). Over a mean follow-up of 22 months, cardiac death or MI (1.8% vs2.2%, P = 0.45), TLR (4.0% vs 5.2%, P = 0.22), and MACE (5.2% vs 7.0%, P = 0.11) did not significantly differ between TR and TF groups, respectively. These results were consistent after propensity score-matched analysis. In conclusion, TR PCI is a feasible alternative approach to conventional TF approaches for bifurcation PCI (clinicaltrials.gov number: NCT00851526).

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)388-395
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Korean medical science
Volume28
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2013 Mar 1

Fingerprint

Thigh
Registries
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
Propensity Score
Therapeutics
Blood Vessels

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Chung, Seungmin ; Her, Sung Ho ; Song, Pil Sang ; Song, Young Bin ; Hahn, Joo Yong ; Choi, Jin Ho ; Lee, Sang Hoon ; Jang, Yangsoo ; Yoon, Junghan ; Tahk, Seung Jea ; Park, Seung Jung ; Choi, Seung Hyuk ; Seung, Ki Bae ; Gwon, Hyeon Cheol. / Trans-radial versus trans-femoral intervention for the treatment of coronary bifurcations : Results from coronary bifurcation stenting registry. In: Journal of Korean medical science. 2013 ; Vol. 28, No. 3. pp. 388-395.
@article{02630faafdfc4bdba20175069c7ab28b,
title = "Trans-radial versus trans-femoral intervention for the treatment of coronary bifurcations: Results from coronary bifurcation stenting registry",
abstract = "Trans-radial (TR) approach is increasingly recognized as an alternative to the routine use of trans-femoral (TF) approach. However, there are limited data comparing the outcomes of these two approaches for the treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions. We evaluated outcomes ofTR and TF percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) in this complex lesion. Procedural outcomes and clinical events were compared in 1,668 patients who underwent PCI for non-left main bifurcation lesions, according to the vascular approach, either TR (n = 503) or TF (n = 1,165). The primary outcome was major adverse cardiac events (MACE), including cardiac death, myocardialinfarction (MI), and target lesion revascularization (TLR) in all patients and in 424 propensity-score matched pairs of patients. There were no significant differences between TR and TF approaches for procedural success in the main vessel (99.6{\%} vs 98.6{\%}, P = 0.08) and side branches (62.6{\%} vs 66.7{\%}, P = 0.11). Over a mean follow-up of 22 months, cardiac death or MI (1.8{\%} vs2.2{\%}, P = 0.45), TLR (4.0{\%} vs 5.2{\%}, P = 0.22), and MACE (5.2{\%} vs 7.0{\%}, P = 0.11) did not significantly differ between TR and TF groups, respectively. These results were consistent after propensity score-matched analysis. In conclusion, TR PCI is a feasible alternative approach to conventional TF approaches for bifurcation PCI (clinicaltrials.gov number: NCT00851526).",
author = "Seungmin Chung and Her, {Sung Ho} and Song, {Pil Sang} and Song, {Young Bin} and Hahn, {Joo Yong} and Choi, {Jin Ho} and Lee, {Sang Hoon} and Yangsoo Jang and Junghan Yoon and Tahk, {Seung Jea} and Park, {Seung Jung} and Choi, {Seung Hyuk} and Seung, {Ki Bae} and Gwon, {Hyeon Cheol}",
year = "2013",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.3346/jkms.2013.28.3.388",
language = "English",
volume = "28",
pages = "388--395",
journal = "Journal of Korean Medical Science",
issn = "1011-8934",
publisher = "Korean Academy of Medical Science",
number = "3",

}

Chung, S, Her, SH, Song, PS, Song, YB, Hahn, JY, Choi, JH, Lee, SH, Jang, Y, Yoon, J, Tahk, SJ, Park, SJ, Choi, SH, Seung, KB & Gwon, HC 2013, 'Trans-radial versus trans-femoral intervention for the treatment of coronary bifurcations: Results from coronary bifurcation stenting registry', Journal of Korean medical science, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 388-395. https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2013.28.3.388

Trans-radial versus trans-femoral intervention for the treatment of coronary bifurcations : Results from coronary bifurcation stenting registry. / Chung, Seungmin; Her, Sung Ho; Song, Pil Sang; Song, Young Bin; Hahn, Joo Yong; Choi, Jin Ho; Lee, Sang Hoon; Jang, Yangsoo; Yoon, Junghan; Tahk, Seung Jea; Park, Seung Jung; Choi, Seung Hyuk; Seung, Ki Bae; Gwon, Hyeon Cheol.

In: Journal of Korean medical science, Vol. 28, No. 3, 01.03.2013, p. 388-395.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Trans-radial versus trans-femoral intervention for the treatment of coronary bifurcations

T2 - Results from coronary bifurcation stenting registry

AU - Chung, Seungmin

AU - Her, Sung Ho

AU - Song, Pil Sang

AU - Song, Young Bin

AU - Hahn, Joo Yong

AU - Choi, Jin Ho

AU - Lee, Sang Hoon

AU - Jang, Yangsoo

AU - Yoon, Junghan

AU - Tahk, Seung Jea

AU - Park, Seung Jung

AU - Choi, Seung Hyuk

AU - Seung, Ki Bae

AU - Gwon, Hyeon Cheol

PY - 2013/3/1

Y1 - 2013/3/1

N2 - Trans-radial (TR) approach is increasingly recognized as an alternative to the routine use of trans-femoral (TF) approach. However, there are limited data comparing the outcomes of these two approaches for the treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions. We evaluated outcomes ofTR and TF percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) in this complex lesion. Procedural outcomes and clinical events were compared in 1,668 patients who underwent PCI for non-left main bifurcation lesions, according to the vascular approach, either TR (n = 503) or TF (n = 1,165). The primary outcome was major adverse cardiac events (MACE), including cardiac death, myocardialinfarction (MI), and target lesion revascularization (TLR) in all patients and in 424 propensity-score matched pairs of patients. There were no significant differences between TR and TF approaches for procedural success in the main vessel (99.6% vs 98.6%, P = 0.08) and side branches (62.6% vs 66.7%, P = 0.11). Over a mean follow-up of 22 months, cardiac death or MI (1.8% vs2.2%, P = 0.45), TLR (4.0% vs 5.2%, P = 0.22), and MACE (5.2% vs 7.0%, P = 0.11) did not significantly differ between TR and TF groups, respectively. These results were consistent after propensity score-matched analysis. In conclusion, TR PCI is a feasible alternative approach to conventional TF approaches for bifurcation PCI (clinicaltrials.gov number: NCT00851526).

AB - Trans-radial (TR) approach is increasingly recognized as an alternative to the routine use of trans-femoral (TF) approach. However, there are limited data comparing the outcomes of these two approaches for the treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions. We evaluated outcomes ofTR and TF percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) in this complex lesion. Procedural outcomes and clinical events were compared in 1,668 patients who underwent PCI for non-left main bifurcation lesions, according to the vascular approach, either TR (n = 503) or TF (n = 1,165). The primary outcome was major adverse cardiac events (MACE), including cardiac death, myocardialinfarction (MI), and target lesion revascularization (TLR) in all patients and in 424 propensity-score matched pairs of patients. There were no significant differences between TR and TF approaches for procedural success in the main vessel (99.6% vs 98.6%, P = 0.08) and side branches (62.6% vs 66.7%, P = 0.11). Over a mean follow-up of 22 months, cardiac death or MI (1.8% vs2.2%, P = 0.45), TLR (4.0% vs 5.2%, P = 0.22), and MACE (5.2% vs 7.0%, P = 0.11) did not significantly differ between TR and TF groups, respectively. These results were consistent after propensity score-matched analysis. In conclusion, TR PCI is a feasible alternative approach to conventional TF approaches for bifurcation PCI (clinicaltrials.gov number: NCT00851526).

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84875801321&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84875801321&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3346/jkms.2013.28.3.388

DO - 10.3346/jkms.2013.28.3.388

M3 - Article

VL - 28

SP - 388

EP - 395

JO - Journal of Korean Medical Science

JF - Journal of Korean Medical Science

SN - 1011-8934

IS - 3

ER -