ArticleJournal of interventional cardiology2020
Clinical Implications of Bifurcation Angles in Left Main Bifurcation Intervention Using a Two-Stent Technique.
Article in Journal of interventional cardiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and validation of a predictive model for side branch flow impairment following stent implantation in patients with non-left main coronary bifurcation lesions: a retrospective analysis.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2026Article
- Long-Term Lesion Progression After Left Main Distal Bifurcation Stenting: Insights From Bifurcation Angle Variation Throughout the Cardiac Cycle.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- The Emerging Role of Computed Tomography Coronary Angiography in the Left Main Stem Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Review
- The influence of reverse flow within side branches on plaque formation relative to coronary bifurcation angles.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Comprehensive Risk Assessment of LAD Disease Progression in CCTA: The CLAP Score Study.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2024Article
- Effect of Stenting Strategy on the Outcome in Patients with Non-Left Main Bifurcation Lesions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Article
- Association between bifurcation angle of the left main coronary artery and severity of stenosis of the proximal left anterior descending artery.Cardiovascular journal of AfricaObservational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe aim of this study was to assess the clinical impact of 3 bifurcation angles in left main (LM) bifurcation treated with the 2-stent technique.
backgroundData are limited regarding the impact of bifurcation angles after LM percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
methodsUsing patient-level 4 multicenter registries in Korea, 462 patients undergoing LM bifurcation PCI with the 2-stent technique were identified (181 crush, 167 T-stenting; 63% 1
resultsIn patients treated with the crush technique, the best cutoff value (BCV) to predict TLF was 152° of the LM-LAD angle. In the crush group, a significantly higher TLF rate, mostly driven by TLR, was observed in the LM-LAD angle ≥152° group compared with the <152° group (35.7% vs. 14.6%; adjusted hazard ratio 3.476; 95% confidence interval 1.612-7.492). An LM-LAD angle ≥152° was an independent predictor of TLF. In the T-stenting, no bifurcation angle affected the clinical outcomes.
conclusionsIn LM bifurcation PCI using the 2-stent technique, wide LM-LAD angle (≥152°) was associated with a greater risk of TLF in the crush, whereas none of the bifurcation angles affected T-stenting outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.