CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

左主干支架

科研文章

荐读文献

Second vs. First generation drug eluting stents in multiple vessel disease and left main stenosis: Two-year follow-up of the observational, prospective, controlled, and multicenter ERACI IV registry Clinical Outcome After DK Crush Versus Culotte Stenting of Distal Left Main Bifurcation Lesions: The 3-Year Follow-Up Results of the DKCRUSH-III Study Long-term results after PCI of unprotected distal left main coronary artery stenosis: the Bifurcations Bad Krozingen (BBK)-Left Main Registry Ten-Year All-Cause Death According to Completeness of Revascularization in Patients With Three-Vessel Disease or Left Main Coronary Artery Disease: Insights From the SYNTAX Extended Survival Study Why NOBLE and EXCEL Are Consistent With Each Other and With Previous Trials Complex PCI procedures: challenges for the interventional cardiologist Stroke Rates Following Surgical Versus Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization Impact of Staging Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Left Main Artery Disease: Insights From the EXCEL Trial Expansion or contraction of stenting in coronary artery disease? Comparison of Outcomes of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention on Native Coronary Arteries Versus on Saphenous Venous Aorta Coronary Conduits in Patients With Low Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction and Impella Device Implantation Achieved or Attempted (from the PROTECT II Randomized Trial and the cVAD Registry)

Clinical Trial9 May, 2017, Volume 10, Issue 5

JOURNAL:Circ Cardiovasc Interv. Article Link

IVUS Guidance Is Associated With Better Outcome in Patients Undergoing Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Stenting Compared With Angiography Guidance Alone

P Andell, S Karlsson, M.A.Mohammad et al Keywords: acute coronary syndrome; angioplasty; comorbidity; percutaneous coronary intervention; thrombosis

ABSTRACT

BackgroundSmall observational studies have indicated better outcome with intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guidance when performing unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), but the overall picture remains inconclusive and warrants further investigation. We studied the impact of IVUS guidance on outcome in patients undergoing unprotected LMCA PCI in a Swedish nationwide observational study.



Methods and Results — Patients who underwent unprotected LMCA PCI between 2005 and 2014 because of stable coronary artery disease or acute coronary syndrome were included from the nationwide SCAAR (Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry). Of 2468 patients, IVUS guidance was used in 621 (25.2%). The IVUS group was younger (median age, 70 versus 75 years) and had fewer comorbidities but more complex lesions. IVUS was associated with larger stent diameters (median, 4 mm versus 3.5 mm). After adjusting for potential confounders, IVUS was associated with significantly lower occurrence of the primary composite end point of all-cause mortality, restenosis, or definite stent thrombosis (hazard ratio, 0.65; 95% confidence interval, 0.50–0.84) and all-cause mortality alone (hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% confidence interval, 0.47–0.82). In 340 propensity score–matched pairs, IVUS was also associated with significantly lower occurrence of the primary end point (hazard ratio, 0.54; 95% confidence interval, 0.37–0.80).



Conclusions — IVUS was associated with an independent and significant outcome benefit when performing unprotected LMCA PCI. Potential mediators of this benefit include larger and more appropriately sized stents, perhaps translating into lower risk of subsequent stent thrombosis. Although residual confounding cannot be ruled out, our findings indicate a possible hazard when performing unprotected LMCA PCI without IVUS guidance.