CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

血管内超声指导

Abstract

Recommended Article

Intravascular ultrasound-guided systematic two-stent techniques for coronary bifurcation lesions and reduced late stent thrombosis Clinical use of intracoronary imaging. Part 1: guidance and optimization of coronary interventions. An expert consensus document of the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions: Endorsed by the Chinese Society of Cardiology Attenuated plaque detected by intravascular ultrasound: clinical, angiographic, and morphologic features and post-percutaneous coronary intervention complications in patients with acute coronary syndromes Catastrophic catheter-induced coronary artery vasospasm successfully rescued using intravascular ultrasound imaging guidance Effect of Intravascular Ultrasound-Guided Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation: Five-Year Follow-Up of the IVUS-XPL Randomized Trial The Role of Vascular Imaging in Guiding Routine Percutaneous Coronary Interventions: A Meta-Analysis of Bare Metal Stent and Drug-Eluting Stent Trials Effect of Intravascular Ultrasound-Guided vs Angiography-Guided Everolimus-Eluting Stent Implantation: The IVUS-XPL Randomized Clinical Trial Intravascular ultrasound findings of early stent thrombosis after primary percutaneous intervention in acute myocardial infarction: a Harmonizing Outcomes with Revascularization and Stents in Acute Myocardial Infarction (HORIZONS-AMI) substudy

Original Research2018 Jan;11(1):111-123.

JOURNAL:JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. Article Link

Optical Frequency Domain Imaging Versus Intravascular Ultrasound in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (OPINION Trial) Results From the OPINION Imaging Study

Otake H, Akasaka T, OPINION Investigators et al. Keywords: intravascular ultrasound; optical coherence tomography; optical frequency domain imaging; percutaneous coronary intervention

ABSTRACT


Objectives - The authors sought to clarify how intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and optical coherence tomography affect percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with current-generation drug-eluting stents in a pre-specified substudy of the OPINION (OPtical frequency domain imaging versus INtravascular ultrasound in percutaneous coronary interventiON) trial, a multicenter, prospective, randomized, noninferiority trial comparing optical frequency domain imaging (OFDI)-guided PCI with IVUS-guided PCI.


Background - The impact of these 2 imaging modalities in guiding PCI remains unknown.


Methods - Of 829 patients enrolled in the OPINION trial, 106 were included in the present imaging substudy. Their PCI was guided by either IVUS or OFDI, but all patients were imaged by both modalities after PCI and by OFDI at 8 months. Angiographic, OFDI, and IVUS images were analyzed by independent core laboratories, and statistical analysis was done independently by a dedicated institution.


Results -  A total of 103 patients underwent either OFDI-guided (n = 54) or IVUS-guided (n = 49) PCI. Immediately after PCI, OFDI-guided PCI was associated with a smaller trend of minimum stent area (5.28 ± 1.65 mm2 vs. 6.12 ± 2.34 mm2; p = 0.088), fewer proximal stent-edge hematomas (p = 0.04), and fewer irregular protrusions (p = 0.014) than IVUS-guided PCI. At 8 months, the neointima area tended to be smaller in the OFDI-guided PCI group than in the IVUS-guided PCI group (0.56 ± 0.30 mm2 vs. 0.80 ± 0.65 mm2; p = 0.057), although the percentage of uncovered struts was significantly higher in the OFDI-guided PCI group than in the IVUS-guided PCI group (6.97 ± 7.03% vs. 4.67 ± 6.43%; p = 0.039). The minimum lumen area was comparable in both groups (p = 0.18).


Conclusions - There were several differences in local findings between OFDI- and IVUS-guided PCI as expected given the different protocols for stent sizing in the 2 groups. The minimum lumen area at the 8-month follow-up was comparable, suggesting that OFDI- and IVUS-guided PCI are similarly feasible using the current-generation drug-eluting stents. (OPtical frequency domain imaging versus INtravascular ultrasound in percutaneous coronary interventiON; NCT01873222)


Copyright © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.