Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34816311›Full record

Trial reportClinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society2022

Randomized non-inferiority TrIal comParing reverse T And Protrusion versus double-kissing and crush Stenting for the treatment of complex left main bifurcation lesions.

Maximilian Olschewski, Helen Ullrich, Maike Knorr, Giulio Makmur, Majid Ahoopai, Thomas Münzel, Tommaso Gori

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readEquivalence TrialRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03714750 (Treatment of Coronary Bifurcation Lesions), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 30% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT03714750 nacompletednot on this map

Treatment of Coronary Bifurcation Lesions: a Non-inferiority, Randomized, Controlled Procedural Outcomes Trial Comparing Reverse T and Protrusion Versus Double-kissing and Crush Stenting

TypeinterventionalSponsorTommaso GoriRan2018 to 2024Enrolled50ConditionsCoronary Artery DiseaseArmsDK crush, Reverse TAP
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Maximilian OlschewskiDepartment of Cardiology, University Medical Center Mainz, Langenbeckstrasse 1, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Helen UllrichDepartment of Cardiology, University Medical Center Mainz, Langenbeckstrasse 1, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Maike KnorrDepartment of Cardiology, University Medical Center Mainz, Langenbeckstrasse 1, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Giulio MakmurDepartment of Cardiology, University Medical Center Mainz, Langenbeckstrasse 1, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Majid AhoopaiDepartment of Cardiology, University Medical Center Mainz, Langenbeckstrasse 1, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Thomas MünzelDepartment of Cardiology, University Medical Center Mainz, Langenbeckstrasse 1, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Tommaso GoriDepartment of Cardiology, University Medical Center Mainz, Langenbeckstrasse 1, 55131, Mainz, Germany. tommaso.gori@unimedizin-mainz.de.
Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz · DEGerman Centre for Cardiovascular Research · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe treatment of left main bifurcation stenoses remains challenging.

aimsWe compare the "Reverse T and Protrusion" (reverse-TAP) technique to Double-Kissing and crush (DK-crush).

methodsThe study was designed as non-inferiority trial, the primary endpoint was percentage stent expansion in the ostial side branch at optical coherence tomography.

results52 consecutive patients (13 females, 17 diabetics, Syntax score 25 [22-29]) with complex coronary bifurcation lesions of the left main were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to Reverse-TAP or DK-crush stenting. The intervention was performed according to protocol in all patients in both randomization groups. Side branch stent expansion was 75 [67-90]% in the DK-crush group and 86 [75-95]% in the reverse-TAP group (one-sided 97.5% lower parametric confidence interval: - 0.28%; P < 0.01 for non-inferiority; P = 0.037 for superiority). Side branch balloon pressure during final kissing was higher in the DK-crush group (14 [12-16] vs. reverse-TAP: 13 [12-14]; P = 0.043). Procedural time was shorter with reverse-TAP (DK-crush: 32 [24-44] min vs reverse-TAP: 25 [22-33] min; P = 0.044). Other procedural parameters were not different between groups. There was no difference in any of the safety endpoints up to 1 month.

conclusionsA reverse-TAP strategy for the interventional treatment of complex coronary lesions was non-inferior and superior to DK-crush for the primary endpoint side branch expansion while requiring less time. A larger study testing long-term clinical outcomes is warranted. TRAIL REGISTRATION: NCT: NCT03714750.

Indexed as

Angioplasty, Balloon, CoronaryCoronary Artery DiseasePercutaneous Coronary InterventionFemaleHumansMaleStentsTreatment OutcomeCoronary bifurcation lesionsOptical coherence tomographyPercutaneous coronary interventions

Identifiers

PMID34816311
PMCPMC9242916
OpenAlexW3217703410

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.