CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

血管内超声指导

Abstract

Recommended Article

Intravascular ultrasound guidance to minimize the use of iodine contrast in percutaneous coronary intervention: the MOZART (Minimizing cOntrast utiliZation With IVUS Guidance in coRonary angioplasTy) randomized controlled trial Role of Proximal Optimization Technique Guided by Intravascular Ultrasound on Stent Expansion, Stent Symmetry Index, and Side-Branch Hemodynamics in Patients With Coronary Bifurcation Lesions Outcomes with intravascular ultrasound-guided stent implantation: a meta-analysis of randomized trials in the era of drug-eluting stents Mechanical complications of everolimus-eluting stents associated with adverse events: an intravascular ultrasound study Intravascular ultrasound predictors for edge restenosis after newer generation drug-eluting stent implantation 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 Consensus from the 5th European Bifurcation Club meeting A three-vessel virtual histology intravascular ultrasound analysis of frequency and distribution of thin-cap fibroatheromas in patients with acute coronary syndrome or stable angina pectoris

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.