CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Identifying coronary artery disease patients at risk for sudden and/or arrhythmic death: remaining limitations of the electrocardiogram Haemodynamic-guided management of heart failure (GUIDE-HF): a randomised controlled trial Circadian-Regulated Cell Death in Cardiovascular Diseases CT Angiographic and Plaque Predictors of Functionally Significant Coronary Disease and Outcome Using Machine Learning Burden of Cardiovascular Diseases in China, 1990-2016: Findings From the 2016 Global Burden of Disease Study From Detecting the Vulnerable Plaque to Managing the Vulnerable Patient Aortic Valve Stenosis Treatment Disparities in the Underserved JACC Council Perspectives rhACE2 Therapy Modifies Bleomycin-Induced Pulmonary Hypertension via Rescue of Vascular Remodeling Contemporary real-world outcomes of surgical aortic valve replacement in 141,905 low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk patients Aspirin with or without Clopidogrel after Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Implantation
|<<... 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 ...>>|

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