2022 Volume 63 Issue 4 Pages 654-660
We aimed to evaluate whether the buddy balloon technique (BBT) is superior to the buddy wire technique (BWT) with regard to the accuracy of stent placement during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
We enrolled patients who had been identified with significant stent movement before the stent was dilated at five hospitals and were randomly converted to either the BBT or BWT technique. The primary endpoints were the incidence of technical success and major adverse cardiovascular events (cardiac death, myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization, and in-stent restenosis) at 2 years of follow-up. The secondary endpoints were the contrast volume used for the procedure and the total procedural time.
From August 2018 to July 2019, 66 patients were enrolled, with 33 patients in each group. All patients were successfully followed up to 2 years. At the primary endpoints, compared with patients treated using BWT, those in the BBT group showed significantly better technical success (93.94% versus 39.39%, respectively; P < 0.0001). There was no significant difference in the incidence of major cardiovascular adverse events (6.06% versus 12.12%, respectively; P = 0.392). At the secondary endpoints, the contrast volume used for the procedure was lower with BBT (85.97 ± 22.45 versus 115.00 ± 21.45 mL, respectively; P < 0.0001); similarly, the total procedural time was shorter with BBT (65.94 ± 12.14 versus 74.33 ± 15.36 minutes, respectively; P < 0.0001).
BBT could better restrict stent movement and facilitate precise stent deployment, with significant superiority over BWT. In addition, BBT can reduce the procedural time and contrast dose.
