CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

左主干支架

Abstract

Recommended Article

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) Stroke Rates Following Surgical Versus Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Using Drug-Eluting Stents Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting for Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Stenosis: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials New-onset atrial fibrillation after PCI and CABG for left main disease: insights from the EXCEL trial and additional studies Differences between the left main and other bifurcations Surgical ineligibility and mortality among patients with unprotected left main or multivessel coronary artery disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention Impact of coronary anatomy and stenting technique on long-term outcome after drug-eluting stent implantation for unprotected left main coronary artery disease Comparative effectiveness analysis of percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with chronic kidney disease and unprotected left main coronary artery disease

Original Research2011 Jul 1;108(1):8-14.

JOURNAL:Am J Cardiol. Article Link

Role of intravascular ultrasound in patients with acute myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention

Ahmed K, Jeong MH, Other Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry Investigators. Keywords: IVUS guided PCI;AMI; DES; outcome

ABSTRACT


Stent thrombosis and restenosis remain drawbacks of drug-eluting stents in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guidance for stent deployment helps optimize its results in stable patients. The aim of this study was to examine the utility of routine IVUS guidance in patients with AMI undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Employing data from Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry (KAMIR), we analyzed 14,329 patients with AMI from April 2006 through September 2010. Patients with cardiogenic shock and rescue PCI after thrombolysis were excluded. Clinical outcomes of 2,127 patients who underwent IVUS-guided PCI were compared to those of 8,235 patients who did not. Mean age was 63.6 ± 13.5 years and 72.3% were men. Patients undergoing IVUS-guided PCI were younger, more often men, more hyperlipemic, and had increased body mass index and left ventricular ejection fraction. Number of treated vessels and stents used, stent length, and stent diameter were increased in the IVUS-guided group. Multivessel involvement was less frequent and American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association type C lesion was more frequent in the IVUS-guided group. Drug-eluting stents were more frequently used compared to bare-metal stents in the IVUS group. There was no significant relation of stent thrombosis between the 2 groups. Twelve-month all-cause death was lower in the IVUS group. After multivariate analysis and propensity score adjustment, IVUS guidance was not an independent predictor for 12-month all-cause death (hazard ratio 0.212, 0.026 to 1.73, p = 0.148). In conclusion, this study does not support routine use of IVUS guidance for stent deployment in patients who present with AMI and undergo PCI.