CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

IVUS Guidance

Abstract

Recommended Article

Use of Intravascular Ultrasound Imaging in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention to Treat Left Main Coronary Artery Disease Comparison of intravascular ultrasound guided versus angiography guided drug eluting stent implantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis Outcomes with intravascular ultrasound-guided stent implantation: a meta-analysis of randomized trials in the era of drug-eluting stents Diffuse atherosclerotic left main coronary artery disease unmasked by fractal geometric law applied to quantitative coronary angiography: an angiographic and intravascular ultrasound study IVUS Guidance for Coronary Revascularization: When to Start, When to Stop? A prospective, randomized trial of intravascular-ultrasound guided compared to angiography guided stent implantation in complex coronary lesions: the AVIO trial Angiographic and clinical comparisons of intravascular ultrasound- versus angiography-guided drug-eluting stent implantation for patients with chronic total occlusion lesions: two-year results from a randomised AIR-CTO study Usefulness of intravascular ultrasound guidance in percutaneous coronary intervention with second-generation drug-eluting stents for chronic total occlusions (from the Multicenter Korean-Chronic Total Occlusion Registry)

Clinical Trial2013 Jan;165(1):65-72.

JOURNAL:Am Heart J. Article Link

A prospective, randomized trial of intravascular-ultrasound guided compared to angiography guided stent implantation in complex coronary lesions: the AVIO trial

Chieffo A, Latib A, Colombo A et al. Keywords: IVUS guided PCI; DES; outcome

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND - No randomized studies have thus far evaluated intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guidance in the drug-eluting stent (DES) era. The aim was to evaluate if IVUS optimized DES implantation was superior to angiographic guidance alone in complex lesions.


METHODS - Randomized, multicentre, international, open label, investigator-driven study evaluating IVUS vs angiographically guided DES implantation in patients with complex lesions (defined as bifurcations, long lesions, chronic total occlusions or small vessels). Primary study endpoint was post-procedure in lesion minimal lumen diameter. Secondary end points were combined major adverse cardiac events (MACE), target lesion revascularization, target vessel revascularization, myocardial infarction (MI), and stent thrombosis at 1, 6, 9, 12, and 24 months.


RESULTS - The study included 284 patients. No significant differences were observed in baseline characteristics. The primary study end point showed a statistically significant difference in favor of the IVUS group (2.70 mm ± 0.46 mm vs. 2.51 ± 0.46 mm; P = .0002). During hospitalization, no patient died, had repeated revascularization, or a Q-wave MI. No difference was observed in the occurrence of non-Q wave MI (6.3% in IVUS vs. 7.0% in angio-guided group). At 24-months clinical follow-up, no differences were still observed in cumulative MACE (16.9%vs. 23.2 %), cardiac death (0%vs. 1.4%), MI (7.0%vs. 8.5%), target lesion revascularization (9.2% vs. 11.9%) or target vessel revascularization (9.8% vs. 15.5%), respectively in the IVUS vs. angio-guided groups. In total, only one definite subacute stent thrombosis occurred in the IVUS group.


CONCLUSIONS - A benefit of IVUS optimized DES implantation was observed in complex lesions in the post-procedure minimal lumen diameter. No statistically significant difference was found in MACE up to 24 months.


TRIAL REGISTRATION -  ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00936169.

Copyright © 2013 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.