HOME SUBSCRIPTIONS CURRENT ISSUE PAST ISSUES CARDIOSOURCE SEARCH HELP FEEDBACK		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Figures Only Full Text (PDF) A correction has been published A correction has been published Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (35) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Costa, R. A. Articles by Moses, J. W. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Costa, R. A. Articles by Moses, J. W.

CLINICAL RESEARCH: FOCUS ISSUE: TREATMENT OF BIFURCATION LESIONS

Bifurcation Coronary Lesions Treated With the "Crush" Technique

An Intravascular Ultrasound Analysis

Ricardo A. Costa, MD^_*, Gary S. Mintz, MD, FACC^_*, Stephane G. Carlier, MD, PhD^_*,_*, Alexandra J. Lansky, MD, FACC^_*, Issam Moussa, MD, FACC^_*, Kenichi Fujii, MD^_*, Hideo Takebayashi, MD^_*, Takenori Yasuda, MD^_*, Jose R. Costa, Jr, MD^_*, Yoshihiro Tsuchiya, MD^_*, Lisette O. Jensen, MD, PhD, Ecaterina Cristea, MD^_*, Roxana Mehran, MD, FACC^_*, George D. Dangas, MD, PhD, FACC^_*, Sriram Iyer, MD, FACC, Michael Collins, MD, FACC^_*, Edward M. Kreps, MD, FACC^_*, Antonio Colombo, MD, FACC, Gregg W. Stone, MD, FACC^_*, Martin B. Leon, MD, FACC^_* and Jeffrey W. Moses, MD, FACC^_*

^_* Cardiovascular Research Foundation and Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York
Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark
Lenox Hill Hospital, New York, New York
San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy

Manuscript received December 16, 2004; revised manuscript received February 28, 2005, accepted March 10, 2005.

^_* Reprint requests and correspondence: Dr. Stephane Carlier, Intravascular Imaging and Physiology, The Cardiovascular Research Foundation, 55 East 59th Street, 5th floor, New York, New York 10022 (Email: scarlier{at}crf.org).

	Abstract

Top Abstract Methods Results Discussion References

 
OBJECTIVES: We report intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) findings after crush-stenting of bifurcation lesions.

BACKGROUND: Preliminary results with the crush-stent technique are encouraging; however, isolated reports suggest that restenosis at the side branch (SB) ostium continues to be a problem.

METHODS: Forty patients with bifurcation lesions underwent crush-stenting with the sirolimus-eluting stent. Postintervention IVUS was performed in both branches in 25 lesions and only the main vessel (MV) in 15 lesions; IVUS analysis included five distinct locations: MV proximal stent, crush area, distal stent, SB ostium, and SB distal stent.

RESULTS: Overall, the MV minimum stent area was larger than the SB (6.7 ± 1.7 mm² vs. 4.4 ± 1.4 mm², p < 0.0001, respectively). When only the MV was considered, the minimum stent area was found in the crush area (rather than the proximal or MV distal stent) in 56%. When both the MV and the SB were considered, the minimum stent area was found at the SB ostium in 68%. The MV minimum stent area measured <4 mm² in 8% of lesions and <5 mm² in 20%. For the SB, a minimum stent area <4 mm² was found in 44%, and a minimum stent area <5 mm² in 76%, typically at the ostium. "Incomplete crushing"—incomplete apposition of SB or MV stent struts against the MV wall proximal to the carina—was seen in >60% of non-left main lesions.

CONCLUSIONS: In the majority of bifurcation lesions treated with the crush technique, the smallest minimum stent area appeared at the SB ostium. This may contribute to a higher restenosis rate at this location.

Abbreviations and Acronyms   CSA = cross-sectional area   DS = diameter stenosis   IVUS = intravascular ultrasound   LM = left main artery   MLD = minimum lumen diameter   MSA = minimum stent area   MV = main vessel   PCI = percutaneous coronary intervention   QCA = quantitative coronary angiography   SB = side branch

	Methods

Top Abstract Methods Results Discussion References

 
Study population.   Between April 2003 and May 2004, 40 patients with a single bifurcation lesion underwent successful stenting using the crush technique and sirolimus-eluting stents in both branches (Cypher, Cordis Corp., Miami Lakes, Florida) and postintervention IVUS analysis. This represents 33% of patients with bifurcation lesions treated with the crush technique during this time period. Intravascular ultrasound was performed in both branches in 25 lesions and just the main vessel (MV) in 15 lesions. In 14 of the 15 patients with just MV IVUS, there was no attempt to image the SB. We primarily report the findings in patients with IVUS of both branches. Written informed consent was obtained before all procedures. Clinical demographics were obtained by hospital chart review.

Technique.   The crush stent technique has been reported in detail elsewhere (5). In brief, both branches are wired and preferably predilated. The first stent is advanced into the SB, but not expanded, while a second stent is advanced into the MV to cover fully the bifurcation. The SB stent is retracted into the MV so that its proximal edge is 4 to 5 mm proximal to the carina and then expanded. The SB stent delivery balloon and guidewire are removed after a contrast injection ensures that no distal dissection is present and no additional SB stents are needed. The MV stent is then expanded. In 23 of the 25 patients, the SB was rewired and redilated with the kissing balloon technique regardless of the angiographic appearance. Aspirin 325 mg and a 300-mg loading dose of clopidogrel were administered preprocedure unless patients were already pretreated. Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors were given per operator discretion, and all patients were prescribed aspirin (81 to 325 mg/day) indefinitely and clopidogrel (75 mg/day) for at least six months.

Angiographic analysis.   Cineangiograms were independently analyzed by the Cardiovascular Research Foundation's Angiographic Core Laboratory. Quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) was performed using the CMS-GFT algorithm (MEDIS, Leesburg, Virginia). For the MV, the minimum lumen diameter (MLD) and the mean reference diameter (RD) (average of 5-mm segments proximal and distal to the lesion) were used to calculate the diameter stenosis: [DS = (1 – MLD/RD) x 100]. For the SB, the MLD and the distal RD were used to calculate DS. The MLD at the SB ostium was also specifically measured.

IVUS imaging and analysis.   All IVUS studies were performed postintervention after intracoronary administration of 100 to 200 µg nitroglycerin using a commercially available system (Boston Scientific, Natick, Massachusetts). The 40-MHz IVUS catheter was advanced >10 mm beyond the lesion, and an imaging run (using automated transducer pullback at 0.5 mm/s) was performed to a point >10 mm proximal to the lesion; IVUS imaging was recorded only during transducer pullback onto 0.5-inch high-resolution s-VHS videotape for off-line analysis.

Quantitative IVUS analysis was performed using computerized planimetry (TapeMeasure, INDEC Systems, Mountain View, California) by an independent experienced observer blinded to the procedure and clinical data. Measurements included stent and lumen cross-sectional areas (CSA). In the MV the proximal and distal references were analyzed; in the SB only the distal reference was analyzed. The reference segments were the least-diseased image slices (largest lumen with least plaque), but within the same segment. Stent CSA was assessed at five locations (Fig. 1):

MV proximal stent: minimum stent CSA (MSA) between the proximal MV stent edge and the crush area;

MV crush area: MSA within the crush segment;

MV distal stent: MSA between the crush area and the distal edge of the MV stent;

SB ostium: MSA <5 mm distal to the SB stent ostium;

SB distal stent: MSA >5 mm distal to the SB stent ostium.

View larger version (70K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 1 A schematic diagram of the in-stent segmental approach to intravascular ultrasound analysis after crush stenting. MV = main vessel; SB = side branch.

Statistical analysis.   Statistical analyses were performed using StatView 5.0 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina). Data are presented as mean ± 1 SD or frequencies. For comparisons of categorical data, Fisher exact test was used. For comparisons of two continuous variables, a two-tailed unpaired Student t test was used. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used for three subgroup comparison (proximal stent vs. crush area vs. distal stent). Correlation of the QCA and IVUS MLD with regression lines was performed using Pearson correlation coefficient. A p value <0.05 was considered significant.

	Results

Top Abstract Methods Results Discussion References

 
Baseline clinical characteristics are shown in Table 1. Postintervention IVUS MLDs were smaller than QCA in the MV (2.55 ± 0.38 mm vs. 2.84 ± 0.40 mm, p = 0.001), but not in the SB (2.17 ± 0.34 mm vs. 2.11 ± 0.42 mm, p = 0.58). However, there was only a moderate correlation between IVUS and QCA MLDs at both locations: MV (r = 0.561, p < 0.001) and SB (r = 0.532, p = 0.006) (Fig. 2).

View larger version (15K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 2 Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) minimum lumen diameter (MLD) versus quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) MLD in the main vessel (left) and side branch (SB) ostium (right).

View larger version (134K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 3 (A, B) Preprocedure angiograms showing a "true bifurcation" lesion (type D) in the proximal left anterior descending coronary artery/first diagonal branch in the cranial and left anterior oblique (LAO) views, respectively. (C, D) Final angiograms showing optimal angiographic result after crush-stenting at the bifurcation lesion (cranial and LAO views, respectively). (E) Intravascular ultrasound image showing the distal portion of the side branch (SB) (first diagonal) stent. (F) Intravascular ultrasound of the SB ostium showing stent underexpansion. MV = main vessel.

View larger version (63K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 4 (A) Intravascular ultrasound image showing complete crush (apposition) of the side branch (SB) stent; arrows indicate the three layers of stent struts. (B, C) Intravascular ultrasound images showing incomplete crush (apposition) of the SB stent struts (arrows).

LM (left anterior descending coronary artery/left circumflex artery) bifurcation lesions with IVUS of both vessels.   Table 4 shows the procedural, QCA, and IVUS data. The SB ostium (left circumflex artery) was predilated in four of five cases (80%), and final kissing balloon inflations were performed in all cases.

Summary analysis.   Overall, mostly driven by non-LM lesions, the MV MSA (6.7 ± 1.7 mm²) was larger than the SB (4.4 ± 1.4 mm², p < 0.0001). The results were similar among the different operators. When only the MV was considered, the MSA was found in the crush area (rather than the proximal or distal stent) in 56%. When both the MV and the SB were considered, the MSA was found at the SB ostium in 68%. The MV MSA measured <4 mm² in 8% of lesions and <5 mm² in 20% of lesions. For the SB an MSA <4 mm² was found in 44%, and an MSA <5 mm² in 76%.

Incomplete apposition of MV stent struts to the vessel wall (in addition to incomplete crush of the SB stent struts) was found in five patients: four in the proximal end of the stent and two in the distal end of the stent (one patient had incomplete apposition at both locations). The only patient with subacute stent thrombosis had incomplete crushing. There was no incomplete SB stent apposition. Incomplete crush was associated with smaller MV nominal balloon sizes (3.06 ± 1.07 mm vs. 3.33 ± 0.26 mm, p = 0.67) and smaller summed (MV + SB) nominal balloon sizes (5.50 ± 0.92 mm vs. 6.08 ± 0.37 mm, p = 0.17), but no difference in SB nominal balloon sizes or QCA MLD in the MV or SB.

	Discussion

Top Abstract Methods Results Discussion References

 
Postprocedure analysis of bifurcation lesions treated with the crush-stent technique with IVUS imaging of both vessels showed: 1) the MSA was smaller in the SB than the MV; 2) the majority of SB lesions showed stent underexpansion with the smallest MSA typically found at the SB ostium; 3) stent underexpansion detected by IVUS was not suspected angiographically; and 4) incomplete stent apposition in the crush area was common. These findings have implications regarding the mechanism and frequency of restenosis after bifurcation stenting using either bare metal or drug-eluting stents.

Causes of in-stent restenosis.   In-stent restenosis can be caused by chronic stent recoil (very rare), chronic stent underexpansion, and/or intimal hyperplasia (7,10). However, serial IVUS studies delineating these mechanisms did not include bifurcation lesions. Therefore, chronic stent recoil cannot be excluded at this location, especially because this location has unusual geometry and (potentially) greater external constrictive forces. Serial IVUS study of both branches at implantation and follow-up would be required to exclude chronic bifurcation stent recoil. Such a study has not been done. In fact, the current report is rare in that it includes 25 of bifurcation stented lesions in which both branches were imaged even at a single point in time, in this case, postimplantation.

In the bare-metal stent era, stenting both branches of a bifurcation increased the risk of restenosis compared to only stenting the MV (1–3). However, imaging of the SB was not performed consistently after stent implantation. Therefore, as shown in the current analysis, the impact of SB stent underexpansion may have been underappreciated, even in patients with good angiographic results of both branches. Thus, angiography appears to have a limited ability to detect underexpanded bifurcation stents.

Ostial SB stent underexpansion may be the dominant mechanism of restenosis with drug-eluting stents because even a small amount of intimal hyperplasia superimposed on significant stent underexpansion can result in restenosis. A few reports of bifurcation lesions treated with two drug-eluting stents still indicate a relatively high incidence of restenosis, and the site of restenosis is systematically at the SB ostium regardless of the technique—T-stenting, modified T-, Y-, or V-stenting (7,11,12). It is not clear whether bifurcation lesions are associated with more intimal hyperplasia compared to nonbifurcations.

In the IVUS substudy of the Sirolimus-Eluting Stent Versus Standard Stents in Patients With Stenosis in Native Coronary Artery (SIRIUS) trial, MSA >5 mm² for the total cohort and MSA >4.5 mm² for vessels <2.8 mm by QCA were thresholds that predicted an "adequate" IVUS lumen at follow-up (9). The positive predictive value of the IVUS stent dimensions was 90%. This was not surprising; once an effective drug (in this case sirolimus) inhibited most of the intimal hyperplasia, the main cause of in-stent restenosis became stent underexpansion. In our group of non-LM bifurcation lesions, MSA <5.0 mm² was found in 80% of lesions (mostly the SB stent ostium), and MSA <4.5 mm² was found in 69% of stents with an mean reference diameter <2.8 mm (again, mostly the SB stent ostium). Thus, our bifurcation lesions frequently had an MSA below the threshold associated with restenosis.

The crush technique was developed to overcome two potential problems with bifurcation stenting: stent underexpansion and incomplete coverage of the SB ostium. In the current study, the MSA at the SB was 3.9 mm² in non-LM lesions and 6.1 mm² in LM lesions. In addition, the MSA was found at the SB ostium in 13 of 20 non-LM lesions and 4 of 5 LM lesions. Regardless of predilation of the SB ostium (80% of cases) and final kissing balloon inflations (all but two cases), IVUS imaging confirmed that the crush technique is still associated with SB stent underexpansion, especially at the SB ostium. Furthermore, the current study found incomplete crushing (i.e., incomplete apposition) of the stents against the MV wall proximal to the carina in the majority of cases. This has been reported by others (13) and may affect drug delivery, thereby contributing to restenosis.

Study limitations.   Only 25 of 40 patients had final IVUS in both branches. However, QCA showed no difference between patients with IVUS of both branches versus IVUS of just the main branch. This study includes only patients with a successful procedure (Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction flow grade 3 and final DS <30% in both branches and no complications); however, this only highlights the current findings. Predilation plus final kissing balloon inflations were performed in 76% of patients; therefore, it was not possible to assess the impact of these procedural steps.

Conclusions and clinical implications.   In the majority of bifurcation lesions treated with the crush technique, the MSA appeared at the SB ostium where the stent CSA is frequently below the cutoff that has been associated with a low rate of restenosis. As a result, stent underexpansion may contribute to the higher reported restenosis rate at this location. In the bare metal stent era, the goal was to optimize the MV intervention and achieve an adequate result in the SB without compromising the MV. In the drug-eluting stent era, it may also be necessary to optimize the result in the SB. The fact that the stent-crush technique (even completed with kissing balloon inflation) leaves small ostial SB lumen diameters and frequent poor MV wall apposition (incomplete crushing) fits well with the reported incidence of high SB ostial recurrence. This should be factored into strategies for bifurcation lesions.

	References

Top Abstract Methods Results Discussion References

 

1. Reimers B, Colombo A, Tobis J. Bifurcation lesionsIn: Colombo A, Tobis J, editors. Techniques in Coronary Artery Stenting. London: Martin Dunitz Ltd; 2000. pp. 171-204.
2. Yamashita T, Nishida T, Adamian MG, et al. Bifurcation lesions: two stents versus one stent—immediate and follow-up results J Am Coll Cardiol 2000;35:1145-1151.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
3. Gobeil F, Lefevre T, Guyon P, et al. Stenting of bifurcation lesions using the Bestent: a prospective dual-center study Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2002;55:427-433.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
4. Kobayashi Y, Mehran R, Moussa I, Reyes A, Moses JW. Negative remodeling at the ostium of the left circumflex artery J Invasive Cardiol 2001;13:805-807.[Medline]
5. Colombo A, Stankovic G, Orlic D, et al. Modified T-stenting technique with crushing for bifurcation lesions: immediate results and 30-day outcome Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2003;60:145-151.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
6. Daemen J, Lemos PA, Serruys PW. Multi-lesion culotte and crush bifurcation stenting with sirolimus-eluting stents: long-term angiographic outcome J Invasive Cardiol 2003;15:653-656.[Medline]
7. Takebayashi H, Kobayashi Y, Dangas G, et al. Restenosis due to underexpansion of sirolimus-eluting stent in a bifurcation lesion Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2003;60:496-499.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
8. de Feyter PJ, Kay P, Disco C, Serruys PW. Reference chart derived from post-stent-implantation intravascular ultrasound predictors of 6-month expected restenosis on quantitative coronary angiography Circulation 1999;100:1777-1783.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
9. Sonoda S, Morino Y, Ako J, et al. Impact of final stent dimensions on long-term results following sirolimus-eluting stent implantation: serial intravascular ultrasound analysis from the Sirius trial J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;43:1959-1963.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
10. Klues HG, Radke PW, Hoffmann R, vom Dahl J. Pathophysiology and therapeutic concepts in coronary restenosis Herz 1997;22:322-334.[Medline]
11. Tanabe K, Hoye A, Lemos PA, et al. Restenosis rates following bifurcation stenting with sirolimus-eluting stents for de novo narrowings Am J Cardiol 2004;94:115-118.[ISI][Medline]
12. Colombo A, Moses JW, Morice MC, et al. Randomized study to evaluate sirolimus-eluting stents implanted at coronary bifurcation lesions Circulation 2004;109:1244-1249.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
13. Ormiston JA, Currie E, Webster MW, et al. Drug-eluting stents for coronary bifurcations: insights into the crush technique Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2004;63:337-338.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. Latib and A. Colombo Bifurcation Disease: What Do We Know, What Should We Do? J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. Intv., June 1, 2008; 1(3): 218 - 226. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. Romagnoli, G. M. Sangiorgi, J. Cosgrave, E. Guillet, and A. Colombo Drug-Eluting Stenting: The Case for Post-Dilation J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. Intv., February 1, 2008; 1(1): 22 - 31. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. A.G. Van Mieghem, A. Thury, W. B. Meijboom, F. Cademartiri, N. R. Mollet, A. C. Weustink, G. Sianos, P. P.T. de Jaegere, P. W. Serruys, and P. de Feyter Detection and characterization of coronary bifurcation lesions with 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography Eur. Heart J., August 2, 2007; 28(16): 1968 - 1976. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Tobis, B. Azarbal, and L. Slavin Assessment of Intermediate Severity Coronary Lesions in the Catheterization Laboratory J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., February 27, 2007; 49(8): 839 - 848. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. S. Mintz and N. J. Weissman Intravascular Ultrasound in the Drug-Eluting Stent Era J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., August 1, 2006; 48(3): 421 - 429. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. A. Costa, G. S. Mintz, and S. G. Carlier Reply J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., June 20, 2006; 47(12): 2567 - 2567. [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. C. McNab, J. Ormiston, and M. W.I. Webster Bifurcation Coronary Lesions and the "Crush" Technique J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., June 20, 2006; 47(12): 2566 - 2567. [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. J. Kereiakes and D. P. Faxon Left Main Coronary Revascularization at the Crossroads Circulation, May 30, 2006; 113(21): 2480 - 2484. [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Colombo, F. Airoldi, I. Iakovou, G. Stankovic, and L. Ge Reply J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., May 2, 2006; 47(9): 1916 - 1917. [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. N. DeMaria, O. Ben-Yehuda, D. Berman, G. K. Feld, G. S. Ginsburg, B. H. Greenberg, W. Y.W. Lew, D. Sahn, and S. Tsimikas Highlights of the Year in JACC 2005 J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., January 3, 2006; 47(1): 184 - 202. [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article Abstract Figures Only Full Text (PDF) A correction has been published A correction has been published Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (35) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Costa, R. A. Articles by Moses, J. W. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Costa, R. A. Articles by Moses, J. W.