CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

左主干支架

科研文章

荐读文献

Intravascular ultrasound in the evaluation and treatment of left main coronary artery disease: a consensus statement from the European Bifurcation Club Safety of intermediate left main stenosis revascularization deferral based on fractional flow reserve and intravascular ultrasound: A systematic review and meta-regression including 908 deferred left main stenosis from 12 studies Percutaneous coronary intervention in left main coronary artery disease: the 13th consensus document from the European Bifurcation Club Optimizing outcomes during left main percutaneous coronary intervention with intravascular ultrasound and fractional flow reserve: the current state of evidence A randomized clinical study comparing double kissing crush with provisional stenting for treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions: results from the DKCRUSH-II (Double Kissing Crush versus Provisional Stenting Technique for Treatment of Coronary Bifurcation Lesions) trial Percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents versus coronary artery bypass grafting in left main coronary artery disease: an individual patient data meta-analysis Everolimus-eluting stent implantation for unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis. The PRECOMBAT-2 (Premier of Randomized Comparison of Bypass Surgery versus Angioplasty Using Sirolimus-Eluting Stent in Patients with Left Main Coronary Artery Disease) study Radial versus femoral artery access in patients undergoing PCI for left main coronary artery disease: analysis from the EXCEL trial Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary-artery bypass grafting for severe coronary artery disease Incidence and Management of Restenosis After Treatment of Unprotected Left Main Disease With Second-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents (from Failure in Left Main Study With 2nd Generation Stents-Cardiogroup III Study)

Original Research2014 Aug;174(8):1360-6.

JOURNAL:JAMA Intern Med. Article Link

Long-term survival in patients undergoing percutaneous interventions with or without intracoronary pressure wire guidance or intracoronary ultrasonographic imaging: a large cohort study

Fröhlich GM, Redwood S, Rakhit R et al. Keywords: IVUS guided PCI; FFR; DES; outcome; cohort

ABSTRACT



IMPORTANCE - Intracoronary pressure wire-derived measurements of fractional flow reserve (FFR) and intravascular ultrasonography (IVUS) provide functional and anatomical information that can be used to guide coronary stent implantation. Although these devices are widely used and recommended by guidelines, limited data exist about their effect on clinical end points.


OBJECTIVE - To determine the effect on long-term survival of using FFR and IVUS during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).


DESIGN AND SETTING - Cohort study based on the pan-London (United Kingdom) PCI registry. In total, 64,232 patients are included in this registry covering the London, England, area.


PARTICIPANTS - All patients (n = 41,688) who underwent elective or urgent PCI in National Health Service hospitals in London between January 1, 2004, and July 31, 2011, were included. Patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (n = 11,370) were excluded.


INTERVENTIONS - Patients underwent PCI guided by angiography (visual lesion assessment) alone, PCI guided by FFR, or IVUS-guided PCI.


MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES - The primary end point was all-cause mortality at a median of 3.3 years.


RESULTS - Fractional flow reserve was used in 2767 patients (6.6%) and IVUS was used in 1831 patients (4.4%). No difference in mortality was observed between patients who underwent angiography-guided PCI compared with patients who underwent FFR-guided PCI (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.67-1.16; P = .37). Patients who underwent IVUS had a slightly higher adjusted mortality (hazard ratio, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.09-1.78; P = .009) compared with patients who underwent angiography-guided PCI. However, this difference was no longer statistically significant in a propensity score-based analysis (hazard ratio, 1.33; 95% CI, 0.85-2.09; P = .25). The mean (SD) number of implanted stents was lower in the FFR group (1.1 [1.2] stents) compared with the IVUS group (1.6 [1.3]) and the angiography-guided group (1.7 [1.1]) (P < .001).


CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE - In this large observational study, FFR-guided PCI and IVUS-guided PCI were not associated with improved long-term survival compared with standard angiography-guided PCI. The use of FFR was associated with the implantation of fewer stents.