CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Operator Experience and Outcomes After Left Main Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Frailty and Bleeding in Older Adults Undergoing TAVR or SAVR: Insights From the FRAILTY-AVR Study The Management of Atrial Fibrillation in Heart Failure: An Expert Panel Consensus Primary Prevention of Heart Failure in Women From Subclinical Atherosclerosis to Plaque Progression and Acute Coronary Events Percutaneous Atriotomy for Levoatrial–to–Coronary Sinus Shunting in Symptomatic Heart Failure: First-in-Human Experience Minimizing Permanent Pacemaker Following Repositionable Self-Expanding Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Aliskiren, Enalapril, or Aliskiren and Enalapril in Heart Failure Metabolic Interactions and Differences between Coronary Heart Disease and Diabetes Mellitus: A Pilot Study on Biomarker Determination and Pathogenesis Clinical Risk Factors and Atherosclerotic Plaque Extent to Define Risk for Major Events in Patients Without Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease: The Long-Term Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography CONFIRM Registry
|<<... 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 ...>>|

Review Article2015 Nov 17;15:153.

JOURNAL：BMC Cardiovasc Disord. Article Link

Comparison of intravascular ultrasound guided versus angiography guided drug eluting stent implantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Zhang YJ, Pang S, Chen SL et al. Keywords: IVUS; angiography; PCI; outcome

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND - Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) can be a useful tool during drug-eluting stents (DES) implantation as it allows accurate assessment of lesion severity and optimal treatment planning. However, numerous reports have shown that IVUS guided percutaneous coronary intervention is not associated with improved clinical outcomes, especially in non-complex patients and lesions.


METHODS - We searched the literature in Medline, the Cochrane Library, and other internet sources to identify studies that compare clinical outcomes between IVUS-guided and angiography-guided DES implantation. Random-effects model was used to assess treatment effect.

RESULTS - Twenty eligible studies with a total of 29,068 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The use of IVUS was associated with significant reductions in major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE, odds ratios [OR] 0.77, 95 % confidence intervals [CI] 0.71-0.83, P < 0.001), death (OR 0.62, 95 % CI 0.54-0.71, p < 0.001), and stent thrombosis (OR 0.59, 95 % CI: 0.47-0.73, P < 0.001). The benefit was also seen in the repeated analysis of matched and randomized studies. In stratified analysis, IVUS guidance appeared to be beneficial not only in patients with complex lesions or acute coronary syndromes (ACS) but also patients with mixed lesions or presentations (MACE: OR 0.69, 95 % CI: 0.60-0.79, p < 0.001, OR 0.81, 95 % CI 0.74-0.90, p < 0.001, respectively). By employing meta-regression analysis, the benefit of IVUS is significantly pronounced in patients with complex lesions or ACS with respect to death (p = 0.048).

CONCLUSIONS - IVUS guidance was associated with improved clinical outcomes, especially in patients with complex lesions admitted with ACS. Large, randomized clinical trials are warranted to identify populations and lesion characteristics where IVUS guidance would be associated with better outcomes.
>CBS CBS 2019

> CBS 2019

> CBS 2019 注册

> CBS 2019 会议日程

> CBS 2019 学术征集

> CBS 2019 热点

 CBSMD

> CBSMD 网站注册

> 教育中心

> 荐读文献

> Top 10 阅读文献

> 文献导读
CBS 2019 CBS 2019 主席团 教育中心 科研动态
Copyright ⓒ CBS MD Nanjing China. All rights reserved. 京ICP备16025898号-11
联系我们| Top