CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Impact of Optimal Medical Therapy on 10-Year Mortality After Coronary Revascularization Cardiovascular Risk Reduction with Icosapent Ethyl for Hypertriglyceridemia Effect of a Home-Based Wearable Continuous ECG Monitoring Patch on Detection of Undiagnosed Atrial Fibrillation The mSToPS Randomized Clinical Trial Incidence, Predictors, and Outcomes of In-Hospital Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Following Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Safety and feasibility of robotic percutaneous coronary intervention: PRECISE (Percutaneous Robotically-Enhanced Coronary Intervention) Study Timing and Causes of Unplanned Readmissions After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Insights From the Nationwide Readmission Database Impact of Statins on Cardiovascular Outcomes Following Coronary Artery Calcium Scoring AIM2-driven inflammasome activation in heart failure Residual Inflammatory Risk in Patients With Low LDL Cholesterol Levels Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention The Year in Cardiovascular Medicine 2020: Coronary Intervention

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.