CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

IVUS Guidance

Abstract

Recommended Article

Meta-analysis of outcomes after intravascular ultrasound-guided versus angiography-guided drug-eluting stent implantation in 26,503 patients enrolled in three randomized trials and 14 observational studies In-stent neoatherosclerosis: a final common pathway of late stent failure Coronary artery imaging with intravascular high-frequency ultrasound Defining a new standard for IVUS optimized drug eluting stent implantation: the PRAVIO study Effects of Intravascular Ultrasound-Guided Versus Angiography-Guided New-Generation Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation: Meta-Analysis With Individual Patient-Level Data From 2,345 Randomized Patients Contribution of stent underexpansion to recurrence after sirolimus-eluting stent implantation for in-stent restenosis Comparison of paclitaxel-eluting stents (Taxus) and everolimus-eluting stents (Xience) in left main coronary artery disease with 3 years follow-up (from the ESTROFA-LM registry) Intravascular ultrasound-derived minimal lumen area criteria for functionally significant left main coronary artery stenosis

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.