LAUSR

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES There are limited data on the preferred treatment strategy in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients with bifurcation lesions. This study aimed to compare clinical outcomes between 1-stent and 2-stent strategies in STEMI patients with bifurcation lesions undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS The COronary BIfurcation Stenting II is a retrospective multicenter registry of 2897 consecutive patients with bifurcation lesions undergoing PCI with drug-eluting stents from January 2003 through December 2009. Among the registered population, 367 (12.7%) patients had STEMI; of these, a 1-stent strategy was used in 304 patients and a 2-stent strategy in 63 patients; 77.1% of the patients received primary PCI with a first-generation drug-eluting stent. The inverse-probability-of-treatment-weighting method was used to adjust for confounding factors. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization, and stent thrombosis. RESULTS The median length of follow-up was 38 months. Postprocedural side branch diameter stenosis differed significantly between the 2 groups (1-stent vs 2-stent, 42.7% vs 9.7%; P < .001). After the performance of inverse-probability-of-treatment-weighting methods, the rate of MACE was significantly higher in the 2-stent group than in the 1-stent group (HR, 1.85; 95%CI, 1.19-2.87; P = .006), mainly driven by target lesion revascularization and stent thrombosis. CONCLUSIONS In STEMI patients with bifurcation culprit lesions undergoing primary PCI, the 2-stent strategy had significantly higher rates of MACE than the 1-stent strategy, despite successful treatment of the side branch. However, this result should be interpreted with caution because this study does not reflect current practice.