CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

血管内超声指导

科研文章

荐读文献

Subclinical Atherosclerosis Burden by 3D Ultrasound in Mid-Life: The PESA Study Intravascular ultrasound-guided drug-eluting stent implantation is associated with improved clinical outcomes in patients with unstable angina and complex coronary artery true bifurcation lesions The outcomes of intravascular ultrasound-guided drug-eluting stent implantation among patients with complex coronary lesions: a comprehensive meta-analysis of 15 clinical trials and 8,084 patients Impact of the complexity of bifurcation lesions treated with drug-eluting stents: the DEFINITION study (Definitions and impact of complEx biFurcation lesIons on clinical outcomes after percutaNeous coronary IntervenTIOn using drug-eluting steNts) Use of Intravascular Ultrasound Imaging in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention to Treat Left Main Coronary Artery Disease In vivo intravascular ultrasound-derived thin-cap fibroatheroma detection using ultrasound radiofrequency data analysis Temporal Trends in Inpatient Use of Intravascular Imaging Among Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the United States Comparison of intravascular ultrasound guided versus angiography guided drug eluting stent implantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis Impact of intravascular ultrasound-guided percutaneous coronary intervention on long-term clinical outcomes in a real world population First-in-man evaluation of intravascular optical frequency domain imaging (OFDI) of Terumo: a comparison with intravascular ultrasound and quantitative coronary angiography

Review Article2016 Aug 1;216:133-9.

JOURNAL:Int J Cardiol. Article Link

Intravascular ultrasound-guided drug-eluting stent implantation: An updated meta-analysis of randomized control trials and observational studies

Steinvil A, Zhang YJ, Garcia-Garcia HM et al. Keywords: Angiography; Drug-eluting stent; Intravascular ultrasound; Meta-analysis

ABSTRACT


The use of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guidance for drug-eluting stent (DES) optimization is limited by the number of adequately powered randomized control trials (RCTs). We performed an updated meta-analysis, including data from recently published RCTs and observational studies, by reviewing the literature in Medline and the Cochrane Library to identify studies that compared clinical outcomes between IVUS-guided and angiography-guided DES implantation from January 1995 to January 2016. This meta-analysis included 25 eligible studies, including 31,283 patients, of whom 3192 patients were enrolled in 7 RCTs. In an analysis of all 25 studies, the summary results for all the events analyzed were significantly in favor of IVUS-guided DES implantation [major adverse cardiac events (MACE, odds ratio [OR] 0.76, 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 0.70-0.82, P<0.001); death (OR 0.62, 95% CI: 0.54-0.72, P<0.001); myocardial infarction (OR 0.67, 95% CI: 0.56-0.80, P<0.001); stent thrombosis (OR 0.58, 95% CI: 0.47-0.73, P<0.001); target lesion revascularization (TLR, OR 0.77, 95% CI: 0.67-0.89, P=0.005); target vessel revascularization (TVR, OR 0.85, 95% CI: 0.76-0.95, P<0.001)]. However, in a separate analysis of RCTs, a favorable result for IVUS-guided DES implantation was found only for MACE (OR 0.66, 95% CI: 0.52-0.84, P=0.001), TLR (OR 0.61, 95% CI: 0.43-0.87, P=0.006), and TVR (OR 0.61, 95% CI: 0.41-0.90, P=0.013). IVUS-guided percutaneous coronary intervention was associated with better overall clinical outcomes than angiography-guided DES implantation. However, in a solely RCT meta-analysis, this benefit was mainly driven by reduced rates of revascularizations.