CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

IVUS Guidance

Abstract

Recommended Article

Atherosclerotic plaque with ultrasonic attenuation affects coronary reflow and infarct size in patients with acute coronary syndrome: an intravascular ultrasound study Assessment Of Proximal Left Anterior Descending Artery Size By Intravascular Ultrasound For Optimal Stent Sizing Clinical impact of intravascular ultrasound guidance in drug-eluting stent implantation for unprotected left main coronary disease: pooled analysis at the patient-level of 4 registries Angiographic and clinical comparisons of intravascular ultrasound- versus angiography-guided drug-eluting stent implantation for patients with chronic total occlusion lesions: two-year results from a randomised AIR-CTO study Impact of Intravascular Ultrasound on Long-Term Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction First-in-man evaluation of intravascular optical frequency domain imaging (OFDI) of Terumo: a comparison with intravascular ultrasound and quantitative coronary angiography Randomized comparison of clinical outcomes between intravascular ultrasound and angiography-guided drug-eluting stent implantation for long coronary artery stenoses A volumetric intravascular ultrasound comparison of early drug-eluting stent thrombosis versus restenosis

Original Research2019 Apr 8;12(7):607-620.

JOURNAL:JACC Cardiovasc Interv. Article Link

Impact of Intravascular Ultrasound-Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention on Long-Term Clinical Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Complex Procedures

Choi KH, Song YB, Hahn JY et al. Keywords: angiography; complex lesion; intravascular ultrasound; outcomes; percutaneous coronary intervention

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES - This study sought to determine whether intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guidance compared with angiographic guidance reduces long-term risk of cardiac death in patients undergoing complex percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

 

BACKGROUND - Although IVUS is a useful tool for accurate assessment of lesion profiles and optimal stent implantation, there are limited data on long-term clinical outcomes between IVUS-guided and angiography-guided PCI for patients with complex lesions.

 

METHODS - From March 2003 through December 2015, a total of 6,005 patients undergoing PCI for complex lesions with drug-eluting stents were enrolled from a prospective institutional registry. All enrolled subjects had at least 1 complex lesion (defined as bifurcation, chronic total occlusion, left main disease, long lesion, multivessel PCI, multiple stent implantation, in-stent restenosis, or heavily calcified lesion). Patients were classified according to use of IVUS or not. Multiple sensitivity analyses, including multivariable adjustment, propensity-score matching, and inverse-probability-weighted method, were performed to adjust baseline differences.

 

RESULTS - Among the study population, IVUS was used in 1,674 patients (27.9%) during complex PCI. The IVUS-guided PCI group had a significantly larger mean stent diameter (3.2 ± 0.4 vs. 3.0 ± 0.4; p < 0.001), and more frequent use of post-dilatation (49.0% vs. 17.9%; p < 0.001) compared with the angiography-guided PCI group. IVUS-guided PCI was associated with a significantly lower risk of cardiac death during 64 months of median follow-up compared with angiography-guided PCI (10.2% vs. 16.9%; hazard ratio: 0.573; 95% confidence interval: 0.460 to 0.714; p < 0.001). Results were consistent after multivariable regression, propensity-score matching, and inverse-probability-weighted method. The risks of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization, and major adverse cardiac events were also significantly lower in the IVUS-guided PCI group.

 

CONCLUSIONS - Among patients with complex coronary artery lesion, IVUS-guided PCI was associated with the lower long-term risk of cardiac death and adverse cardiac events compared with angiography-guided PCI. Use of IVUS should be actively considered for complex PCI.

 

Copyright © 2019 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.