Efficacy of one- vs. two-stent implantation for coronary bifurcation lesions in diabetic patients utilizing AIR2 as an endpoint.

ObjectiveThis study aimed to assess the long term outcomes (all-cause death, myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization, and silent restenosis at 12 months) of one-stent vs. two-stent implantation due to coronary bifurcation lesionsin diabetic patients using AIR2 as a new endpoint.Methods and resultsA total of 178 diabetic patients with true coronary bifurcation lesions underwent percutaneous coronary intervention in the DK-Crush trials. All patients were stratified based on the stent placement strategy: one-stent group (n=76) and two-stent group (n=102). Results showed the primary endpoint, AIR2, in one-stent group was twice that in two-stent group (32.9% vs. 16.7%, P=0.013). The incidence of silent restenosis at 12 months was also significantly higher in one-stent group (19.7% versus 4.9%, P=0.003). Moreover, Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed the cumulative AIR2-free survival rate after a 12-month follow-up was markedly lower in one-stent group than in two-stent group. Interestingly, MACEs, including death, myocardial infarction and repeat revascularization, were not comparable between 2 groups (13.2% vs. 12.7%, P=0.935). Likewise, the incidence of definite or probable ST in one-stent group was also similar to that in two-stent group (2.6% vs. 4.9%, P=0.761).ConclusionOur study indicates that, in terms of the AIR2 as a combined clinical and angiographic endpoint, two-stent implantation is superior to one-stent implantation for the treatment of coronary bifurcation intervention in diabetic patients.