title: Long-term clinical outcomes of the one-stent technique versus the two-stent technique for non-left main true coronary bifurcation disease in the era of drug-eluting stents.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Few studies have compared the long-term major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) between the one-stent technique (stenting only the main branch) and the two-stent technique (stenting of both the main and side branches) for the treatment of true coronary bifurcation lesions in the drug-eluting stent era. Therefore, we investigated this issue using the large nationwide coronary bifurcation registry.
  
  
  METHODS
  The 1,147 patients with non-left main coronary true bifurcation lesions underwent percutaneous coronary intervention in the Korea Coronary Bifurcation Stent (COBIS) registry. All patients were stratified based on the stent placement technique: one stent (n = 898) versus two stents (n = 249). MACE, including death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), and repeat vessel and lesion revascularization (TVR and TLR), were evaluated.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The median follow-up duration was 20 months. The MACEs did not differ between the 2 groups. Findings from the one-stent group were similar to those of the two-stent group in composite of death, MI, or TVR, based on analysis by crude, multivariate Cox hazard regression model, inverse-probability-of-treatment weighting (hazard ratio [HR] 0.911, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.614-1.351; HR 0.685 95% CI 0.381-1.232; HR 1.235, 95% CI 0.331-4.605, respectively). In further analysis with propensity score matching, the overall findings were consistent.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The findings of the present study indicate that the one-stent technique was not inferior to the two-stent technique for the treatment of non-left main true coronary bifurcation lesions in terms of long-term MACEs.
authors.affiliation: Cardiovascular Center and Cardiology Division, Uijeongbu St. Mary's Hospital and College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Uijeongbu, Gyeonggi-Do, Republic of Korea.
authors.forename: Yoon-Seok
authors.initials: YS
authors.lastname: Koh
authors.forename: Pum-Joon
authors.initials: PJ
authors.lastname: Kim
authors.forename: Kiyuk
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Chang
authors.forename: Hun-Jun
authors.initials: HJ
authors.lastname: Park
authors.forename: Myung-Ho
authors.initials: MH
authors.lastname: Jeong
authors.forename: Hyo-Soo
authors.initials: HS
authors.lastname: Kim
authors.forename: Yangsoo
authors.initials: Y
authors.lastname: Jang
authors.forename: Hyeon-Cheol
authors.initials: HC
authors.lastname: Gwon
authors.forename: Seung-Jung
authors.initials: SJ
authors.lastname: Park
authors.forename: Ki-Bae
authors.initials: KB
authors.lastname: Seung
mesh_terms: D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D019917:Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation / Q000379:methods*; D017023:Coronary Angiography; D003324:Coronary Artery Disease / Q000401:mortality / Q000628:therapy*; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D062645:Percutaneous Coronary Intervention / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000379:methods* / Q000401:mortality; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D015607:Stents; D015996:Survival Rate; D016896:Treatment Outcome