Intravascular Lithotripsy for Calcific Coronary Bifurcations: Procedural Success and 1-Year Clinical Outcomes
Federico Oliveri1, Giulia D'Acunto2, Martijn J H van Oort1
1Department of Cardiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Insights
Intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) effectively treats calcified coronary bifurcation lesions, showing high technical success and comparable 1-year outcomes to non-bifurcation sites. This study confirms IVL
Area of Science:
- Cardiovascular Interventions
- Medical Device Technology
- Interventional Cardiology
Background:
- Intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) is a novel treatment for complex coronary artery calcification.
- Limited data exists on IVL's performance in calcified coronary bifurcation lesions.
Purpose of the Study:
- To assess the technical success and 1-year clinical outcomes of IVL in patients with calcified coronary bifurcation lesions.
- To compare these outcomes against non-bifurcation lesions.
Main Methods:
- Prospective BENELUX-IVL registry data was analyzed.
- Patients were divided into bifurcation and non-bifurcation groups.
- Technical success and in-hospital Major Adverse Cardiac Events (MACE) were primary endpoints.
Main Results:
- The bifurcation group (n=114) had higher SYNTAX scores and longer procedure times than the non-bifurcation group (n=395).
- Technical success rates were similar: 91.2% for bifurcation vs. 90.0% for non-bifurcation.
- One-year MACE rates were comparable: 9.6% vs. 5.8%, respectively.
Conclusions:
- Intravascular lithotripsy is safe and effective for treating calcified coronary bifurcation lesions.
- High technical success and low adverse event rates were observed, supporting IVL's role in complex PCI.
Background:
Intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) has emerged as a promising treatment for heavily calcified coronary lesions. However, evidence regarding its effectiveness in calcific bifurcation lesions remains limited.
Objective:
We aimed to evaluate the technical success and 1-year clinical outcomes of IVL in calcified coronary bifurcation lesions.
Methods:
Patients undergoing PCI with the use of IVL from the ongoing prospective BENELUX-IVL registry were included. Participants were stratified into bifurcation and non-bifurcation groups. The primary technical endpoint was technical success, defined as successful crossing of the IVL catheter across the target lesion with a residual stenosis of < 30%. The primary safety endpoint was in-hospital major adverse cardiac events (MACE).
Results:
Among 509 patients, 114 (22.4%) had coronary bifurcation lesions. Compared to the non-bifurcation group, the bifurcation group had higher SYNTAX scores (25 [18-33] vs. 18 [10-29]; p < 0.01), longer procedural times (100 [75-129] min vs. 78 [59-107] min; p < 0.01), and greater contrast volume use (208 ± 8 mL vs. 176 ± 4 mL; p < 0.01). Abrupt side branch occlusion (1.8%) and bail-out two-stent techniques (3.6%) were infrequent. IVL achieved comparable technical success (91.2% vs. 90.0%, p = 0.71) and 1-year MACE rates (9.6% vs. 5.8%, p = 0.20) in bifurcation versus non-bifurcation lesions.
Conclusion:
IVL demonstrates excellent safety and efficacy in calcified coronary bifurcation PCI, achieving high technical success with low device-dependent adverse event rates.
More Related Videos
06:39Novel Percutaneous Approach for Deployment of 3D Printed Coronary Stenosis Implants in Swine Models of Ischemic Heart Disease
Published on: February 18, 2020
12:00Evaluation of a Novel Laser-assisted Coronary Anastomotic Connector - the Trinity Clip - in a Porcine Off-pump Bypass Model
Published on: November 24, 2014
Related Concept Videos
Urinary Tract Calculi VI: Surgical Management
Urinary Tract Calculi III: Medical Management
Coronary Artery Disease V: Interprofessional Care
Imaging Studies for Cardiovascular System VI: Calcium -Scoring CT
