CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Prognostic Value of SYNTAX Score in Patients With Infarct-Related Cardiogenic Shock: Insights From the CULPRIT-SHOCK Trial Prognostic value of fibrinogen in patients with coronary artery disease and prediabetes or diabetes following percutaneous coronary intervention: 5-year findings from a large cohort study Early versus delayed invasive intervention in acute coronary syndromes Colchicine Inhibits Neutrophil Extracellular Trap Formation in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Impact of Chronic Total Coronary Occlusion Location on Long-term Survival After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Early Natural History of Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection Risk Factors Associated With Major Cardiovascular Events 1 Year After Acute Myocardial Infarction A randomised trial comparing two stent sizing strategies in coronary bifurcation treatment with bioresorbable vascular scaffolds - The Absorb Bifurcation Coronary (ABC) trial Mortality in STEMI patients without standard modifiable risk factors: a sex-disaggregated analysis of SWEDEHEART registry data Mild Hypothermia in Cardiogenic Shock Complicating Myocardial Infarction - The Randomized SHOCK-COOL Trial

Review Article2014 Mar;7(3):233-43.

JOURNAL:JACC Cardiovasc Interv. Article Link

Intravascular ultrasound-guided implantation of drug-eluting stents to improve outcome: a meta-analysis

Jang JS, Song YJ, Kang W et al. Keywords: drug-eluting stent(s); intravascular ultrasound; percutaneous coronary intervention

ABSTRACT


OBJECTIVES - The aim of this study was to systematically review and perform a meta-analysis of randomized trials and observational studies of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)-guided versus angiography-guided implantation of drug-eluting stents (DES).



BACKGROUND - Although studies in the bare-metal stents era suggested that there were clinical benefits to IVUS guidance, it is still controversial whether percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with DES guided by IVUS leads to better clinical outcomes.


METHODS - Relevant studies published through March 31, 2013, were searched for and identified in the electronic databases. Summary estimates were obtained using a random-effects model.


RESULTS From 138 initial citations, 3 randomized trials and 12 observational studies with 24,849 patients (11,793 IVUS-guided and 13,056 angiography-guided) were included in this study. Comparison of IVUS- versus angiography-guided PCI disclosed odds ratios (ORs) for major adverse cardiac events of 0.79 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.69 to 0.91; p = 0.001). IVUS-guided PCI was also associated with significantly lower rates of all-cause mortality (OR: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.51 to 0.81; p < 0.001), myocardial infarction (OR: 0.57; 95% CI: 0.42 to 0.78; p < 0.001), target vessel revascularization (OR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.68 to 0.95; p = 0.01), and stent thrombosis (OR: 0.59; 95% CI: 0.42 to 0.82; p = 0.002). A meta-analysis of propensity-matched studies demonstrated similar results in terms of clinical outcomes, but not repeat revascularization.


CONCLUSIONS - IVUS-guided DES implantation is associated with significantly lower rates of adverse clinical events compared with angiography guidance. Further study is needed to clarify which subgroups of subjects with IVUS guidance will have greater benefit.



Copyright © 2014 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.