CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

IVUS Guidance

Abstract

Recommended Article

Mechanisms of in-stent restenosis after drug-eluting stent implantation: intravascular ultrasound analysis Intravascular Ultrasound Guidance Reduces Cardiac Death and Coronary Revascularization in Patients Undergoing Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation: Results From a Meta-Analysis of 9 Randomized Trials and 4724 Patients Intravascular Ultrasound Guidance vs. Angiographic Guidance in Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction - Long-Term Clinical Outcomes From the CREDO-Kyoto AMI Registry Comparison of intravascular ultrasound versus angiography-guided drug-eluting stent implantation: a meta-analysis of one randomised trial and ten observational studies involving 19,619 patients Impact of plaque components on no-reflow phenomenon after stent deployment in patients with acute coronary syndrome: a virtual histology-intravascular ultrasound analysis Usefulness of intravascular ultrasound to predict outcomes in short-length lesions treated with drug-eluting stents Impact of intravascular ultrasound guidance on long-term mortality in stenting for unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis Comprehensive intravascular ultrasound assessment of stent area and its impact on restenosis and adverse cardiac events in 403 patients with unprotected left main disease

Review Article2017 April; 17(4): 258-268

JOURNAL:Anatol J Cardiol. Article Link

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

Fan ZG, Gao XF, Tian NL et al. Keywords: intravascular ultrasound, drug-eluting stent, complex lesions, meta-analysis

ABSTRACT



OBJECTIVE - The effects of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)-guided drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation in patients with complex coronary artery lesions remains to be controversial. This study sought to evaluate the outcomes of IVUS guidance in these patients.



METHODS - The EMBASE, Medline, and other internet sources were searched for relevant articles. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE), including all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), and target-vessel revascularization (TVR). The incidence of definite/probable stent thrombosis (ST) was analyzed as the safety endpoint.


RESULTS - Fifteen clinical trials involving 8.084 patients were analyzed. MACE risk was significantly decreased following IVUS-guided DES implantation compared with coronary angiography (CAG) guidance (odds ratio [OR] 0.63, 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 0.53-0.73, p<0.001), which might mainly result from the lower all-cause mortality risk (OR 0.52, 95% CI: 0.40-0.67, p<0.001), MI (OR 0.70, 95% CI: 0.56-0.86, p=0.001), and TVR (OR 0.53, 95% CI: 0.40-0.70, p<0.001). The subgroup analyses indicated better outcomes of IVUS guidance in DES implantation for these patients with left main disease or bifurcation lesions.



CONCLUSION - IVUS guidance in DES implantation is associated with a significant reduction in MACE risk in patients with complex lesions, particularly those with left main disease or bifurcation lesions. More large and powerful randomized trials are still warranted to guide stenting decision making.