Table 3 Procedural and technical data
Intended stenting technique | Test of significance | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Provisional | Two-stent technique | ||||
N (%) | N (%) | Value | p-Value | Sig | |
Presentation | |||||
CCS | 43 (30.28) | 6 (28.57) | Fisher's exact test | 0.036 | S |
UA | 22 (15.49) | 4 (19.05) | |||
NSTEMI | 33 (23.24) | 9 (42.86) | |||
STEMI | 42 (29.58) | 1 (4.76) | |||
Post-arrest | 2 (1.41) | 1 (4.76) | |||
No. of vessels affected | |||||
1(Isolated LM) | 6 (4.23) | 0 (0) | Fisher's exact test | 0.02 | S |
2(LM + 1vessel) | 79 (55.63) | 7 (33.33) | |||
3(LM + 2vessel) | 44 (30.99) | 14 (66.67) | |||
4(LM + 3vessel) | 13 (9.15) | 0 (0) | |||
Distribution of bifurcation | |||||
LM | 6 (4.23) | 0 (0) | Fisher's exact test | < 0.001 | S |
LM_LAD | 109 (76.76) | 2 (9.52) | |||
LM_LCX | 2 (1.41) | 0 (0) | |||
LM_LAD_LCX | 25 (17.61) | 19 (90.48) | |||
Preparation of MB | |||||
yes | 108 (76.06) | 19 (90.48) | Fisher's exact test | 0.168 | NS |
Preparation of SB | |||||
yes | 34 (23.94) | 19 (90.48) | Fisher's exact test | < 0.001 | S |
Medina classification | |||||
1,1,1 | 30 (21.13) | 19 (90.48) | Fisher's exact test | < 0.001 | S |
1,1,0 | 75 (52.82) | 2 (9.52) | |||
1,0,1 | 28 (19.72) | 0 (0) | |||
0,1,1 | 5 (3.52) | 0 (0) | |||
1,0,0 | 2 (1.41) | 0 (0) | |||
0,1,0 | 2 (1.41) | 0 (0) | |||
Vessel stented first | |||||
MB | 142 (100) | 0 (0) | Fisher's exact test | < 0.001 | S |
SB | 0 (0) | 21 (100) | |||
TIMI flow in SB after 1st stent | |||||
0-I | 3 (2.11) | 0 (0) | Fisher's exact test | 0.833 | NS |
II | 21 (14.79) | 4 (19.05) | |||
III | 118 (83.1) | 17 (80.95) | |||
Rewiring the SB | |||||
No | 38 (26.76) | 0 (0) | Fisher's exact test | 0.004 | S |
Yes | 104 (73.24) | 21 (100) | |||
Kissing balloons after 1st stent | |||||
Yes | 99 (69.72) | 20 (95.24) | X2 = 6.046 | 0.014 | S |
Further improvement to SB needed | |||||
Yes | 31 (21.83) | 21 (100) | X2 = 51.46 | < 0.001 | S |
Intended stenting technique | Test of significance | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Provisional | Two-stent technique | ||||
N (%) Median (IQR) Mean ± SD | N (%) Median (IQR) Mean ± SD | Value | p-Value | Sig | |
Reason for the second stent | |||||
Residual lesion | 11 (7.75) | 21 (100) | Fisher's Exact test | < 0.001 | S |
Vessel compromise | 19 (13.38) | 0 (0) | |||
Dissection inside vessel | 4 (2.82) | 0 (0) | |||
Kissing balloons after 2nd stent | |||||
Yes | 28 (19.72) | 20 (95.24) | X2 = 50.22 | < 0.001 | S |
Final POT | |||||
Yes | 126 (88.73) | 21 (100) | Fisher's Exact test | 0.229 | NS |
Eventual technique | |||||
Provisional | 108 (76.06) | 0 (0) | Fisher's Exact test | < 0.001 | S |
Provisional to double | 34 (23.94) | 0 (0) | |||
Two-stent | 0 (0) | 21 (100) | |||
Two-stent technique | |||||
Provisional | 108 (76.06) | 0 (0) | Fisher's Exact test | < 0.001 | S |
Minicrush | 0 (0) | 3 (14.29) | |||
DK crush | 0 (0) | 18 (85.71) | |||
TAP | 34 (23.94) | 0 (0) | |||
GPIIb/IIIa inhibitors | |||||
Yes | 25 (17.61) | 1 (4.76) | Fisher's Exact test | 0.203 | NS |
MB stent diameter | 3.5 ± 0.39 | 3.63 ± 0.3 | t = − 1.488 | 0.139 | NS |
MB stent length | 32.32 ± 7.74 | 29.52 ± 6.83 | t = 1.566 | 0.119 | NS |
SB Stent | |||||
Yes | 34(23.94) | 21 (100) | X2 = 48.66 | < 0.001 | S |
SB stent diameter | 3.33 ± 0.35 | 3.23 ± 0.31 | t = 1.111 | 0.272 | NS |
SB stent length | 23.15 ± 4.21 | 24.95 ± 8.58 | t = − 0.896 | 0.378 | NS |
Syntax score | 25.18 ± 6.12 | 29.81 ± 4.13 | t = − 4.466 | < 0.001 | S |
STS score | 1.4 (0.8–2.1) | 1.2 (0.9–2.2) | z = − 0.404 | 0.686 | NS |
Use of IVUS or FFR | |||||
Yes | 9 (6.34) | 0 (0) | Fisher's exact test | 0.606 | NS |
Provisional | Two-stent technique | Fisher exact test | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
N | % | N | % | p-value | sig | |
Additional vessel stented | 36 | 25.4 | 1 | 4.8 | 0.047 | S |
RCA | 26 | 18.3 | 0 | 0.0 | 0.027 | S |
OM | 5 | 3.5 | 0 | 0.0 | 1 | NS |
Diagonal | 3 | 2.1 | 1 | 4.8 | 0.427 | NS |
LAD | 2 | 1.4 | 0 | 0.0 | 1 | NS |
LCX | 2 | 1.4 | 0 | 0.0 | 1 | NS |