CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

IVUS Guidance

Abstract

Recommended Article

Comparison of inhospital mortality, length of hospitalization, costs, and vascular complications of percutaneous coronary interventions guided by ultrasound versus angiography Long-term survival in patients undergoing percutaneous interventions with or without intracoronary pressure wire guidance or intracoronary ultrasonographic imaging: a large cohort study In-stent neoatherosclerosis: a final common pathway of late stent failure Use of IVUS guided coronary stenting with drug eluting stent: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials and high quality observational studies Intravascular Ultrasound Guidance Is Associated With Better Outcome in Patients Undergoing Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Stenting Compared With Angiography Guidance Alone Correlations between fractional flow reserve and intravascular ultrasound in patients with an ambiguous left main coronary artery stenosis Contribution of stent underexpansion to recurrence after sirolimus-eluting stent implantation for in-stent restenosis Long-term outcomes with use of intravascular ultrasound for the treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions

Clinical Trial2014 Nov;7(11):1287-93.

JOURNAL:JACC Cardiovasc Interv. Article Link

Intravascular ultrasound guidance to minimize the use of iodine contrast in percutaneous coronary intervention: the MOZART (Minimizing cOntrast utiliZation With IVUS Guidance in coRonary angioplasTy) randomized controlled trial

Mariani J Jr, Guedes C, Lemos PA et al. Keywords: contrast; coronary intravascular ultrasound; renal failure; stent

ABSTRACT


OBJECTIVES - The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guidance on the final volume of contrast agent used in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).


BACKGROUND - To date, few approaches have been described to reduce the final dose of contrast agent in PCIs. We hypothesized that IVUS might serve as an alternative imaging tool to angiography in many steps during PCI, thereby reducing the use of iodine contrast.

METHODS - A total of 83 patients were randomized to angiography-guided PCI or IVUS-guided PCI; both groups were treated according to a pre-defined meticulous procedural strategy. The primary endpoint was the total volume contrast agent used during PCI. Patients were followed clinically for an average of 4 months.

RESULTS - The median total volume of contrast was 64.5 ml (interquartile range [IQR]: 42.8 to 97.0 ml; minimum, 19 ml; maximum, 170 ml) in the angiography-guided group versus 20.0 ml (IQR: 12.5 to 30.0 ml; minimum, 3 ml; maximum, 54 ml) in the IVUS-guided group (p < 0.001). Similarly, the median volume of contrast/creatinine clearance ratio was significantly lower among patients treated with IVUS-guided PCI (1.0 [IQR: 0.6 to 1.9] vs. 0.4 [IQR: 0.2 to 0.6, respectively; p < 0.001). In-hospital and 4-month outcomes were not different between patients randomized to angiography-guided and IVUS-guided PCI.

CONCLUSIONS - Thoughtful and extensive use of IVUS as the primary imaging tool to guide PCI is safe and markedly reduces the volume of iodine contrast compared with angiography-alone guidance. The use of IVUS should be considered for patients at high risk of contrast-induced acute kidney injury or volume overload undergoing coronary angioplasty. (Minimizing cOntrast utiliZation With IVUS Guidance in coRonary angioplasTy [MOZART]; NCT01947335).

Copyright © 2014 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.