Randomized Comparison of Conservative Versus Aggressive Strategy for Provisional Side Branch Intervention in Coronary Bifurcation Lesions: Results from the SMART-STRATEGY (Smart Angioplasty Research Team-Optimal Strategy for Side Branch Intervention...
Overview
Authors
Affiliations
Objectives: The authors sought to compare conservative and aggressive strategies for provisional side branch (SB) intervention in coronary bifurcation lesions.
Background: The optimal provisional approach for coronary bifurcation lesions has not been established.
Methods: In this prospective randomized trial, 258 patients with a coronary bifurcation lesion treated with drug-eluting stents were randomized to a conservative (n = 128) or aggressive (n = 130) SB intervention strategy. The criteria for SB intervention after main vessel stenting differed between the conservative and aggressive groups; Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction flow grade <3 versus diameter stenosis >75% for non-left main bifurcations and diameter stenosis >75% versus diameter stenosis >50% for left main bifurcations. The primary endpoint was target vessel failure (cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization) at 12 months.
Results: Left main bifurcation lesions were noted in 114 patients (44%) and true bifurcation lesions in 171 patients (66%). SB ballooning after main vessel stenting and SB stenting after SB ballooning were performed less frequently in the conservative group than in the aggressive group (25.8% vs. 68.5%, p < 0.001; and 7.0% vs. 30.0%, p < 0.001, respectively). The conservative strategy was associated with a lower incidence of procedure-related myocardial necrosis compared with the aggressive strategy (5.5% vs. 17.7%, p = 0.002). At 12 months, the incidence of target vessel failure was similar in both groups (9.4% in the conservative group vs. 9.2% in the aggressive group, p = 0.97).
Conclusions: Compared with the aggressive strategy, the conservative strategy for provisional SB intervention was associated with similar long-term clinical outcomes and a lower incidence of procedure-related myocardial necrosis. (Optimal Strategy for Side Branch Stenting in Coronary Bifurcation Lesions [SMART-STRATEGY]; NCT00794014).
Ziyad M, Shah S, Rauf M, Shah S, Ullah S, Ullah R Cureus. 2025; 17(2):e78436.
PMID: 40046367 PMC: 11882106. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.78436.
An Approach to Non-left Main Bifurcation Lesions: A Contemporary Review.
Calik A, Cader F, Rafflenbeul E, Okutucu S, Khan S, Canbolat I US Cardiol. 2024; 17:e10.
PMID: 39493947 PMC: 11526486. DOI: 10.15420/usc.2022.25.
Review of Progress in Interventional Therapy for Coronary Bifurcation Lesions.
Gao C, Li D, Dai H, Liu H, Liu P, Cheng M Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2024; 25(1):2.
PMID: 39077661 PMC: 11262401. DOI: 10.31083/j.rcm2501002.
Sheiban I, Ge Z, Kan J, Zhang J, Santoso T, Munawar M Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022; 9:910313.
PMID: 36304537 PMC: 9595024. DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.910313.
Percutaneous coronary intervention of bifurcation lesions.
Hildick-Smith D, Arunothayaraj S, Stankovic G, Chen S EuroIntervention. 2022; 18(4):e273-e291.
PMID: 35866256 PMC: 9912967. DOI: 10.4244/EIJ-D-21-01065.