Balloon-stent kissing technique versus jailed wire technique for interventional treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Side-branch occlusion is a serious complication of provisional one-stent strategies used to treat coronary bifurcation lesions. The aim of the study was to compare the short- and long-term clinical outcomes between the balloon-stent kissing technique (BSKT) and jailed wire technique (JWT) in patients with non-left coronary bifurcation lesions.This prospective, double-blinded, randomized controlled study enrolled 89 consecutive patients (aged 18-85 years) with 90 true bifurcation lesions (hemadostenosis ≥70%; bifurcation angle <90°; Medina classification 1.1.1, 1.0.1, or 0.1.1) who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) at the Zhongshan Hospital Affiliated to Dalian University (China) between January 2013 and May 2016. The patients were randomly divided into the BSKT (44 patients, 45 lesions) and JWT (45 patients, 45 lesions) groups. The intervention was conducted according to technical requirements using a single-stent strategy. Operative success rate, occurrence of complications, postoperative quantitative coronary angiography, and incidence of perioperative and long-term major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) were compared between groups.The intervention success rate was 100% in both groups. After main-branch stenting, the BSKT was associated with significantly lower rates of side-branch occlusion (0% vs 15.6%, P < .05) and side-branch post-processing (8.9% vs 26.7%, P < .05) than the JWT. The BSKT was associated with significantly lower degrees of postoperative proximal main-branch residual stenosis (6.1 ± 5.1% vs 9.6 ± 8.6%, P < .05) and side-branch ostial stenosis (51.6 ± 20.6% vs 70.3 ± 20.8%, P < .05) than the JWT. The incidence of perioperative MACEs was significantly lower in the BSKT group than in the JWT group (0% vs 13.3%, P < .05). Patients were followed for a mean duration of 19.0 ± 6.1 months. The occurrence rates of long-term MACEs, angina of Canadian Cardiovascular Society grade ≥2, and severe heart failure were not significantly different between groups.The BSKT is a safe and effective technique that may have advantages over the JWT with regard to protection of the side-branch during PCI for bifurcation lesions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".