Initial Experience with Mini-Crush Versus Double Kissing Crush in Bifurcation Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Insights from PROGRESS-BIFURCATION registry

Abstract

Background:There is limited data on use of the mini-crush technique in two-stent bifurcation percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).Methods:This retrospective, observational, cohort study was performed across 6 centers in the United States, Russia, and Turkey between 2013-2024, as part of the Prospective Global Registry of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Bifurcation Lesions (PROGRESS-BIFURCATION, NCT05100992). We evaluated procedural characteristics of patients who underwent bifurcation stenting using the mini-crush technique and compared it with those who were treated with double kissing (DK) crush.Results:Of 1,138 PCIs involving 1,499 lesions, 46 (4.04%) were performed using the mini-crush technique and 147 lesions (12.91%) using the DK crush technique. Baseline characteristics of the patients were similar in both groups. There was no difference between mini-crush versus DK-crush in technical success (100.0% versus 98.6%; p=0.99), procedural success (95.1% versus 97.1%, p=0.62), procedural complications (10.9% versus 14.7%, p=0.51), or in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (6.5% versus 5.7%, p=0.73). In contrast, mini-crush technique was associated with shorter procedure time (79.00 vs 116.50 minutes; p<0.001; Figure 1A), fluoroscopy time (23.50 vs 30.35 minutes, p=0.002; Figure 1A), and lower contrast volume (150 versus 109 milliliters; p<0.001; Figure 1B), and air kerma radiation dose (1.11 vs 1.71 gray; p=0.024; Figure 1C).Conclusion:In patients undergoing PCI for bifurcation lesions, the mini-crush technique had similar rates of procedural complications and in-hospital MACE as compared with the DK crush technique but required less contrast volume, fluoroscopy time, radiation dose, and procedural time.