CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Optical Coherence Tomography

Abstract

Recommended Article

Comparison of Coronary Intimal Plaques by Optical Coherence Tomography in Arteries With Versus Without Internal Running Vasa Vasorum Clinical Impact of Suboptimal Stenting and Residual Intrastent Plaque/Thrombus Protrusion in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome: The CLI-OPCI ACS Substudy (Centro per la Lotta Contro L'Infarto-Optimization of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Acute Coronary Syndrome) Optical Coherence Tomography to Assess Proximal Side Optimization Technique in Crush Stenting
|<< 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >>|

Original Research2017 Aug 1;90(2):E46-E52.

JOURNAL：Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. Article Link

Impact of an optical coherence tomography guided approach in acute coronary syndromes: A propensity matched analysis from the international FORMIDABLE-CARDIOGROUP IV and USZ registry

Iannaccone M, D'Ascenzo F, Frangieh AH et al. Keywords: acute coronary syndrome; drug eluting stent; optical coherence tomography

ABSTRACT

AIM - To determine the potential clinical impact of OCT (Optical Coherence Tomography) during primary percutaneous coronary intervention in patients presenting with ACS (Acute Coronary Syndrome).


METHODS AND RESULTS - FORMIDABLE is a multicentre retrospective registry enrolling all patients presenting with ACS and treated with an OCT-guided approach, while the USZ registry enrolled patients treated with a standard angiography guided approach. Multivariate adjustment was performed via a propensity score matching. The number stents useds was the primary outcome, while the incidence of MACE (a composite of death, myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization, and stent thrombosis) was the secondary endpoint. A total of 285 patients OCT-guided and 1,547 angiography guided patients were enrolled, resulting in 270 for each cohort after propensity score with matching. Two stents were used in 12% versus 34%; 3 stents in 8% versus 38% of the patients (P < 0.001). After a follow up of 700 days (450-890), there was no difference in myocardial infarction (6% vs. 6%, P = 0.86), while MACE (11% vs. 16%, P = 0.06), target vessel revascularization (2% vs. 4%, P = 0.15) and stent thrombosis rates (0% vs. 2.7%, P = 0.26) were numerically lower for the OCT-guided cohort but none of these endpoints did reach statistical significance.

CONCLUSIONS - An OCT-guided approach reduced the number of stents used, number of patients treated with more than one stent, while there was no statistically significant difference in clinical endpoints while most of them were numerically lower, including stent thrombosis rates. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

© 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
>CBS CBS 2019

> CBS 2019 REGISTRATION

> CBS 2019 PROGRAM

> CBS 2019 CALL FOR SCIENCE

> CBS 2019 SPOTLIGHTS

 CBSMD

> CBSMD WEBSITE REGISTRATION

> EDUCATION CENTER

> RECOMMANDED PAPER

> TOP 10 RESEARCH PAPER

> PRE-READING

CBS 2019 CBS 2019 FACULTY Education Resource CBSMD Scientific Library
Copyright ⓒ CBS MD Nanjing China. All rights reserved. 京ICP备16025898号-11
联系我们| Top