CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

IVUS Guidance

Abstract

Recommended Article

A volumetric intravascular ultrasound comparison of early drug-eluting stent thrombosis versus restenosis Intravascular ultrasound predictors for edge restenosis after newer generation drug-eluting stent implantation Comparison of intravascular ultrasound versus angiography-guided drug-eluting stent implantation: a meta-analysis of one randomised trial and ten observational studies involving 19,619 patients Intravascular ultrasound-guided vs angiography-guided drug-eluting stent implantation in complex coronary lesions: Meta-analysis of randomized trials Impact of final stent dimensions on long-term results following sirolimus-eluting stent implantation: serial intravascular ultrasound analysis from the sirius trial 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 Differential prognostic effect of intravascular ultrasound use according to implanted stent length Impact of intravascular ultrasound guidance in routine percutaneous coronary intervention for conventional lesions: data from the EXCELLENT trial

Original ResearchMarch, 2018 Volume 71, Issue 11 Supplement

JOURNAL:J Am Coll Cardiol. Article Link

Assessment Of Proximal Left Anterior Descending Artery Size By Intravascular Ultrasound For Optimal Stent Sizing

Shlofmitz E; Matsumura M; Mintz GS et al. Keywords: proximal left anterior descending artery; IVUS; stent sizing

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND - As the LAD supplies almost half of the myocardium, the proximal LAD (PLAD) should rarely be small. Given the prognostic significance of both the PLAD and minimal stent area, we evaluated PLAD sizes by IVUS.

METHODS - From isolated review of the angiograms from 147 pts who underwent IVUS-guided stenting of de novo PLAD lesions, 4 interventional cardiologists (two of whom were experienced IVUS users) recommended the stent diameter. An IVUS core lab then analyzed the lesion and vessel segments. Based on the smallest mean IVUS vessel diameter (VD), the optimal stent diameter was chosen by downsizing by 0.25-0.5 mm, except in VD >4.0mm.

RESULTS - Mean age was 66 yrs, 30% had diabetes, and 44% presented with ACS. The proximal and distal VDs were 4.5 ± 0.6 mm and 4.0 ± 0.6 mm, respectively. The smallest IVUS VD was 3.9 ± 0.5 mm (occurring in the lesion and distal reference in 44% and 56% of cases). 2% of the smallest VDs were <3.0 mm, and 93% of IVUS-guided optimal stent diameters were ≥3.0 mm (Figure). The mean stent size recommended by the 4 ICs based on angiography was 3.2 ± 0.3 mm; stent size was underestimated by 58% and 65% of experienced and inexperienced IVUS users, respectively. In a logistic model, diabetes was the only predictor for underestimation (OR [95%CI]; 2.48 [1.25- 4.93], P=0.009).

CONCLUSION - Stent diameters in the PLAD are frequently under-estimated based on angiography alone, and should rarely by <3.0 mm. Irrespective of experience, routine IVUS use may result in more appropriate stent sizing in the PLAD.