Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Dedicated Bifurcation Stent Technology: Implications for Everyday Practice

2,090 views

Published on

TCT2015 Presentation - Jens Flensted Lassen, M.D.

Published in: Health & Medicine
  • Be the first to comment

Dedicated Bifurcation Stent Technology: Implications for Everyday Practice

  1. 1. Dedicated Bifurcation Stent Technology: Implications for Everyday Practice Jens Flensted Lassen MD, PH.D., FESC The Heart Centre, Rigshospitalet University of Copenhagen Denmark
  2. 2. Disclosure Statement of Financial Interest I, (Jens Flensted Lassen) DO NOT have a financial interest/arrangement or affiliation with one or more organizations that could be perceived as a real or apparent conflict of interest in the context of the subject of this presentation.
  3. 3. Disclosure Statement of Financial Interest ……. BUT !!! I, (Jens Flensted Lassen) am a Board member and one of the Directors of the European Bifurcation Club (EBC) and my view on bifurcation stenting is heavily influenced by the thoughts and consensus statements of EBC.
  4. 4. Treating coronary bifurcations Why is it difficult? • True versus non-true bifurcations • Small and Large SB • Diameter difference between MB and SB • MB tapering • Angels between MB and SB • 4-D movements • Extension of disease in SB
  5. 5. EuroIntervention 2014;10:545-560 Percutaneous coronary intervention for coronary bifurcation disease: consensus from the first 10 years of the European Bifurcation Club meetings
  6. 6. ©2015EuroIntervention.Allrightsreserved. EuroIntervention 2015;11:V106-V110 Differences between the left main and other bifurcations
  7. 7. 4-D movements
  8. 8. EuroIntervention 2014;10:545-560 Percutaneous coronary intervention for coronary bifurcation disease: consensus from the first 10 years of the European Bifurcation Club meetings
  9. 9. Treating Bifurcation Lesions Why is it difficult? • Anatomic Variation – Side Branch : Main Branch Diameter – Angle of Bifurcation • Disease Burden: Wide Variation Difficult to Assess
  10. 10. Workhorse DES: Optimized for Straight Lesions Poorly Suited to of Bifurcation Lesions • Wide Variety of Techniques Required Poorly Characterized/Inconsistently Performed: crush, culotte, reverse culotte, internal crush, reverse crush, T, provisional T, Y, extended Y, V, SKS, shotgun, Helqvist, sleeve, modified crush, Buchbinder, minicrush, mini crush, short back and sides, DK crush, flower
  11. 11. • Predilate – side branch and/or main branch • Safety wire • P.O.T. • Kiss/No Kiss • Post Dilate – Non vs Semi Compliant – Sizing Many Techniques: Many Questions ? ? ? ? ?? ? ? ? ? ? ?? ?? ? ? ? ?? ? ? ? ? ? ?? ? ? ? ?? ? ? ? ? ? ?? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?? ?
  12. 12. EuroIntervention2015;11:V96-V98
  13. 13. Patient level meta analysis of BBC1 & NORDIC 1 Circ Cardiovasc interv. 2011;4:57-64
  14. 14. EuroIntervention 2014;10:545-560 Percutaneous coronary intervention for coronary bifurcation disease: consensus from the first 10 years of the European Bifurcation Club meetings
  15. 15. "Life can only be understood backwards; but it must be lived forwards.“ Søren Kirkegaard (1813-1855 Danish philosopher) The dilemma in the provisional side branch stenting in Bifurcation lesions
  16. 16. EBC Consensus: • Side branch diameter and length can both be used visually as surrogates for volume of muscle at risk. • Large side branches with ostial disease extending >5mm from the carina are likely to require two stents. • Side branches whose access is particularly challenging should be secured by stenting once accessed.
  17. 17. Bifurcation Lesions: Defining The Need • Coverage • Radial Strength • Addresses All – Angulation – SB-MB Diameter Differences – Disease Burden  Ease-of-Use  Tracking (Single Wire)  Equipment (Operator’s Choice) – Guide Catheters (5 or 6 Fr) – Guidewires  Compatibility: Workhorse stent (DES or BMS) USER ISSUES CLINICAL REQUIREMENTS
  18. 18. Dedicated Bifurcation Stents: Difficult Design Problem: Many Failures
  19. 19. Historical Dedicated Devices Failed Clinically Not ‘easy to use’ • Larger profile than workhorse stents • Rotational orientation required • Two wire tracking Poor Clinical Outcomes • Lower Procedural Success than standard stenting • Higher Event Rates than standard stenting
  20. 20. The Ideal Dedicated Device • Easy to use and safe • Simplify the procedure - Shorten procedural time, reduce X-ray exposure - reduce contrast media • Allow continuously SB access (wire) • Predictable successful ostial SB-stenting • High rate of procedural success • Optimal long terms results (restenosis & ST-rates, low) • Abel to treat all kinds of bifurcations. • Abel to be flexible during cardiac cycles
  21. 21. Tryton Tryton Pivotal Trials (RCT and Confirmatory): • Landmark studies • Improvement in clinical outcomes in large branches. Long-term results required. • Simplified 2-stent technique • New guidelines include incorporation of dedicated stents (Tryton).
  22. 22. Complex (1.1.1) Bifurcation Lesion Involving a Large Side Branch (LAD-D1) Baseline Tryton
  23. 23. - Dedicated devices should focus on: 1) Easy, safe and quick, treatment of the Left Main 2) Protection of a side branch the operator don´t want to loose ESC & EBC 2014 (15) Consensus
  24. 24. Conclusion – the way forward • Evaluate dedicated devices in “significant” SB • Dedicated devices already challenge 2-stent techniques – Ease of use (simplified technique) – Designed, tested, and approved for bifurcation • Indications for dedicated devices – Large Side branches – Complex Disease – Left Main • Dedicated devices may challenge provisional stenting - Ease of use (simplified technique)
  25. 25. Thank you for your attention "Life can only be understood backwards; but it must be lived forwards.“ Søren Kirkegaard (1813-1855 Danish philosopher)

×