Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10553/74037
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorPan, Manuelen_US
dc.contributor.authorMedina, Alfonsoen_US
dc.contributor.authorRomero, Miguelen_US
dc.contributor.authorOjeda, Soledaden_US
dc.contributor.authorMartin, Pedroen_US
dc.contributor.authorSuarez De Lezo, Javieren_US
dc.contributor.authorSegura, Joseen_US
dc.contributor.authorMazuelos, Franciscoen_US
dc.contributor.authorNovoa, Joseen_US
dc.contributor.authorSuarez De Lezo, Joseen_US
dc.date.accessioned2020-08-07T11:13:53Z-
dc.date.available2020-08-07T11:13:53Z-
dc.date.issued2014en_US
dc.identifier.issn0002-8703en_US
dc.identifier.otherScopus-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10553/74037-
dc.description.abstractBackground A simple approach is the predominant strategy for the percutaneous coronary intervention of bifurcation lesions. Performing side branch (SB) predilation in this context is currently a matter of controversy. In this study, we assess the efficacy of SB predilatation before a provisional T-stent strategy for bifurcation lesions. Methods Between February 2009 and November 2012, 372 patients with true bifurcation lesions were randomized to either predilation of the SB (n = 187) or no predilatation (n = 185) before main branch (MB) stent implantation and a subsequent SB provisional stent strategy. Results There were no significant differences between the patient groups regarding the baseline characteristics. After MB stent implantation, the TIMI flow of the SB was higher in the patients with SB predilation: TIMI flow 0 to 1; 2 (1%) versus 18 (10%), P <.001; and TIMI flow III; 179 (96%) versus 152 (82%), P <.001. Side branch stenting rates were 4% versus 3%, P = not significant. In addition, 60 patients (32%) from the SB predilation group presented SB residual stenosis by visual inspection <50%, and TIMI flow â III did not require any additional treatment. The failure rate of SB rewiring, the time of rewiring, the number of wires used, and the incidence of major events were similar in both groups of patients. Conclusions Predilation of the SB resulted in improved TIMI flow after MB stenting and less indication to subsequently treat the SB. If rewiring of the SB is required, predilation did not hinder this maneuver.en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.relation.ispartofThe American heart journalen_US
dc.sourceAmerican Heart Journal [ISSN 0002-8703], v. 168 (3), p. 374-380, (Enero 2014)en_US
dc.subject320501 Cardiologíaen_US
dc.titleAssessment of side branch predilation before a provisional T-stent strategy for bifurcation lesions. A randomized trialen_US
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/Articleen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.ahj.2014.05.014en_US
dc.identifier.scopus84908545821-
dc.contributor.authorscopusid7202544866-
dc.contributor.authorscopusid7202723590-
dc.contributor.authorscopusid7202430759-
dc.contributor.authorscopusid8654250900-
dc.contributor.authorscopusid7406037925-
dc.contributor.authorscopusid16067353500-
dc.contributor.authorscopusid55415591100-
dc.contributor.authorscopusid24450657100-
dc.contributor.authorscopusid24335829400-
dc.contributor.authorscopusid7006785516-
dc.identifier.eissn1097-6744-
dc.description.lastpage380en_US
dc.identifier.issue3-
dc.description.firstpage374en_US
dc.relation.volume168en_US
dc.investigacionCiencias de la Saluden_US
dc.type2Artículoen_US
dc.utils.revisionen_US
dc.date.coverdateEnero 2014en_US
dc.identifier.ulpgces
dc.description.sjr3,423
dc.description.jcr4,463
dc.description.sjrqQ1
dc.description.jcrqQ1
dc.description.scieSCIE
item.grantfulltextnone-
item.fulltextSin texto completo-
Appears in Collections:Artículos
Show simple item record

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

33
checked on Feb 5, 2023

Page view(s)

34
checked on Oct 22, 2022

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Share



Export metadata



Items in accedaCRIS are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.