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.
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.
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.
Treatment of Coronary Bifurcation Lesions: a Non-inferiority, Randomized, Controlled Procedural Outcomes Trial Comparing Reverse T and Protrusion Versus Double-kissing and Crush Stenting
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative Efficacy of Bifurcation Stenting Techniques for Left Main Disease: A Network Meta-analysis With Reconstructed Time-to-Event Data.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2026Review
- Six-months clinical and intracoronary imaging follow-up after reverse T and protrusion or double-kissing and crush stenting for the treatment of complex left main bifurcation lesions.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.