CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

旋磨术

Abstract

Recommended Article

Healed coronary plaque rupture as a cause of rapid lesion progression: a case demonstrated with in vivo histopathology by directional coronary atherectomy Outcomes After Orbital Atherectomy of Severely Calcified Left Main Lesions: Analysis of the ORBIT II Study One-Year Outcomes of Orbital Atherectomy of Long, Diffusely Calcified Coronary Artery Lesions State of the art: evolving concepts in the treatment of heavily calcified and undilatable coronary stenoses - from debulking to plaque modification, a 40-year-long journey Long-term clinical outcomes of permanent polymer everolimus-eluting stent implantation following rotational atherectomy for severely calcified de novo coronary lesions: Results of a 22-center study (Tokyo-MD PCI Study) Two-year outcomes after treatment of severely calcified coronary lesions with the orbital atherectomy system and the impact of stent types: Insight from the ORBIT II trial Orbital atherectomy for treating de novo, severely calcified coronary lesions: 3-year results of the pivotal ORBIT II trial Coronary Calcification and Long-Term Outcomes According to Drug-Eluting Stent Generation

Original Research2015 Nov;8(13):1704-14.

JOURNAL:JACC Cardiovasc Interv. Article Link

Comparison of Stent Expansion Guided by Optical Coherence Tomography Versus Intravascular Ultrasound: The ILUMIEN II Study (Observational Study of Optical Coherence Tomography [OCT] in Patients Undergoing Fractional Flow Reserve [FFR] and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention)

Maehara A, Ben-Yehuda O, Stone GW et al. Keywords: intervention; intravascular ultrasound; optical coherence tomography; percutaneous coronary stent(s)

ABSTRACT


OBJECTIVES - The present study sought to determine whether optical coherence tomography (OCT) guidance results in a degree of stent expansion comparable to that with intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guidance.


BACKGROUND - The most important predictor of adverse outcomes (thrombosis and restenosis) after stent implantation with IVUS guidance is the degree of stent expansion achieved.


METHODS - We compared the relative degree of stent expansion (defined as the minimal stent area divided by the mean of the proximal and distal reference lumen areas) after OCT-guided stenting in patients in the ILUMIEN(Observational Study of Optical Coherence Tomography [OCT] in Patients Undergoing Fractional Flow Reserve [FFR] and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention) (N = 354) and IVUS-guided stenting in patients in the ADAPT-DES (Assessment of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy With Drug-Eluting Stents) study (N = 586). Stent expansion was examined in all 940 patients in a covariate-adjusted analysis as well as in 286 propensity-matched pairs (total N = 572).


RESULTS - In the matched-pair analysis, the degree of stent expansion was not significantly different between OCT and IVUS guidance (median [first, third quartiles] = 72.8% [63.3, 81.3] vs. 70.6% [62.3, 78.8], respectively, p = 0.29). Similarly, after adjustment for baseline differences in the entire population, the degree of stent expansion was also not different between the 2 imaging modalities (p = 0.84). Although a higher prevalence of post-PCI stent malapposition, tissue protrusion, and edge dissections was detected by OCT, the rates of major malapposition, tissue protrusion, and dissections were similar after OCT- and IVUS-guided stenting.


CONCLUSIONS - In the present post-hoc analysis of 2 prospective studies, OCT and IVUS guidance resulted in a comparable degree of stent expansion. Randomized trials are warranted to compare the outcomes of OCT- and IVUS-guided coronary stent implantation.


Copyright © 2015 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.