Home > Journals > Minerva Cardioangiologica > Past Issues > Minerva Cardioangiologica 2013 February;61(1) > Minerva Cardioangiologica 2013 February;61(1):61-70

CURRENT ISSUE
 

JOURNAL TOOLS

eTOC
To subscribe
Submit an article
Recommend to your librarian
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Reprints
Permissions

 

REVIEWS   

Minerva Cardioangiologica 2013 February;61(1):61-70

Copyright © 2013 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

Do angle and anatomy influence outcomes in bifurcation stenting?

Lucisano L., Pennacchi M., Stio R. E., Calcagno S., Mancone M., Sardella G.

Department of Cardiovascular, Respiratory, Nephrologic and Geriatric Sciences, Policlinico Umberto I, “La Sapienza” University of Rome, Rome, Italy


PDF


Coronary bifurcation lesions are regarded as complex and their treatment is still the subject of substantial debate. Important elements to consider before approaching a bifurcation include angle and anatomy, in particular the take off angle (proximal angle, A) that is between the proximal MB and SB and the carina angle (distal angle, B) that is between distal main branch (MB) and side branch (SB) and also the extent and distribution of disease on the side branch and its size. Many techniques have been used to treat coronary bifurcation lesions such as provisional stenting or double stenting but no consensus technique has been accepted primarily due to variation of disease severity, angle and anatomy. Angle B is the unique statistically significant independent predictor factor influencing outcomes. Bifurcation angle and anatomy are important predictors of short and long-term outcomes after bifurcation treatment. Moreover we should evaluate it after wiring MB and SB so as after pre-dilatation because of side branch access and carina area angle anatomy variation and plaque shift. Should be investigated if the developing of new dedicated devices for bifurcation lesions could mix the advantages of one and two-stent techniques.

top of page