CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

IVUS Guidance

Abstract

Recommended Article

Relationship between intravascular ultrasound guidance and clinical outcomes after drug-eluting stents: the assessment of dual antiplatelet therapy with drug-eluting stents (ADAPT-DES) study Intravascular Ultrasound-Guided Versus Angiography-Guided Implantation of Drug-Eluting Stent in All-Comers: The ULTIMATE trial IVUS Guidance Is Associated With Better Outcome in Patients Undergoing Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Stenting Compared With Angiography Guidance Alone Intravascular imaging in coronary artery disease The Year in Cardiovascular Medicine 2020: Imaging: Looking back on the Year in Cardiovascular Medicine for 2020 in the field of imaging are Fausto Pinto, José Luis Zamorano and Chiara Bucciarelli-Ducci. Judy Ozkan speaks with them Intravascular ultrasound-guided percutaneous coronary intervention in left main coronary bifurcation lesions: a review Optical coherence tomography is a kid on the block: I would choose intravascular ultrasound Intravascular ultrasound guidance in drug-eluting stents implantation: a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials

Clinical Trial2018 Jul 6.[Epub ahead of print]

JOURNAL:Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. Article Link

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

Chen L, Xu T, Chen SL et al. Keywords: Coronary artery bifurcation lesions; Intravascular ultrasound guidance; Long-term follow-up; Major adverse cardiac event; Stent expansion

ABSTRACT


Stenting coronary artery bifurcation lesion is associated with suboptimal clinical results. Clinical improvement by intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guided bifurcation stenting is controversial because small-side-branch (SB), low-risk patients and false bifurcations were included in previous studies that had no exact IVUS criteria for optimal stent expansion. We sought determine whether IVUS guidance is superior to angiography guidance for patients with true and complex bifurcation lesions. Between July 2006 and July 2012, 1465 patients with unstable angina and Medina 1,1,1 or 0,1,1 coronary bifurcation lesions were prospectively studied. 310 patients in the IVUS guidance (defined as stent symmetry index > 0.7, stent expansion index > 0.9, well apposition, and no Type B/C dissection) group were paired with 620 patients in the angiography group by propensity score-matching. The primary endpoint was the rate of composite major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), or clinically-driven target vessel revascularization) at 1-year and at the end of study after indexed procedure. Use of IVUS guidance was mainly driven by stenting technique selection and identification of lesions' specificities. IVUS criteria for optimal stent expansion were achieved in 82.9% of patients which contribute to IVUS group data assessment and the rest did not meet optimal criteria. MACE occurred in 10.0% of patients at 1-year follow-up and 15.2% at the 7-year follow-up in the IVUS group, significantly different from 15.0% (p = 0.036) and 22.4% (p = 0.01) in the angiography group, respectively. Compared to angiography guidance, IVUS guidance also resulted in a lower 7-year cardiac death rate (6.5 versus 1.3%, p = 0.002) and MI (8.4 versus 2.3%, P < 0.001). Any revascularization was also statistically lower in the IVUS group through whole study period, compared to the angiography group. Lower MACE rates were observed in IVUS guidance group in a 7-year follow-up compared with angiography guidance alone.