CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

IVUS Guidance

Abstract

Recommended Article

Intravascular Ultrasound-Guided Versus Angiography-Guided Implantation of Drug-Eluting Stent in All-Comers: The ULTIMATE trial IVUS Guidance Is Associated With Better Outcome in Patients Undergoing Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Stenting Compared With Angiography Guidance Alone Intravascular imaging in coronary artery disease Optical coherence tomography is a kid on the block: I would choose intravascular ultrasound Intravascular ultrasound-guided percutaneous coronary intervention in left main coronary bifurcation lesions: a review The Year in Cardiovascular Medicine 2020: Imaging: Looking back on the Year in Cardiovascular Medicine for 2020 in the field of imaging are Fausto Pinto, José Luis Zamorano and Chiara Bucciarelli-Ducci. Judy Ozkan speaks with them Does calcium burden impact culprit lesion morphology and clinical results? An ADAPT-DES IVUS substudy Intravascular ultrasound guidance in drug-eluting stents implantation: a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials

Clinical TrialAvailable online 15 November 2017

JOURNAL:JACC Cardiovasc Interv. Article Link

Clinical Outcomes Following Intravascular Imaging-Guided Versus Coronary Angiography–Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Stent Implantation: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis of 31 Studies and 17,882 Patients

Buccheri S, Franchina G, Capodanno D et al. Keywords: clinical outcomes; coronary angiography; intravascular ultrasound; optical coherence tomography; percutaneous coronary intervention

ABSTRACT


OBJECTIVES - The authors sought to explore the comparative clinical efficacy of different imaging modalities for guiding percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI).


BACKGROUND - Coronary angiography (CA) is the standard imaging modality for intraprocedural guidance of PCI. Intracoronary imaging techniques, including intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and optical coherence tomography (OCT), can overcome some limitations of CA.


METHODS - Comprehensive hierarchical Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials and adjusted observational studies comparing clinical outcomes of PCI with stent implantation guided by CA, IVUS, or OCT.


RESULTS - A total of 31 studies encompassing 17,882 patients were included. Compared with CA guidance, the risks of all-cause death (odds ratio [OR]: 0.74, 95% credible interval [CrI]: 0.58 to 0.98), myocardial infarction (OR: 0.72, 95% CrI: 0.52 to 0.93), target lesion revascularization (OR: 0.74, 95% CrI: 0.58 to 0.90) and stent thrombosis (OR: 0.42, 95% CrI: 0.20 to 0.72) were significantly reduced by IVUS guidance. PCI guidance using either IVUS or OCT was associated with a significant reduction of major adverse cardiovascular events (OR: 0.79, 95% CrI: 0.67 to 0.91 and OR: 0.68, 95% CrI: 0.49 to 0.97, respectively) and cardiovascular death (OR: 0.47, 95% CrI: 0.32 to 0.66 and OR: 0.31, 95% CrI: 0.13 to 0.66, respectively). No differences in terms of comparative clinical efficacy were found between IVUS and OCT for all the investigated outcomes. Pooled estimates were consistent across several sensitivity analyses. However, the treatment effect of IVUS on all-cause death was neutralized in the analysis restricted to randomized clinical trials (OR: 1.03, 95% CrI: 0.41 to 2.14).


CONCLUSIONS - Compared with CA, the use of intravascular imaging techniques for PCI guidance reduces the risk of cardiovascular death and adverse events.


Click here to read the related editorial titled "Intravascular Imaging and Stent Implantation and the Elephant in the Room" by Gary S. Mintz.