CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Invasive Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association Comparison of Accuracy of One-Use Methods for Calculating Fractional Flow Reserve by Intravascular Optical Coherence Tomography to That Determined by the Pressure-Wire Method No causal effects of plasma homocysteine levels on the risk of coronary heart disease or acute myocardial infarction: A Mendelian randomization study Impact of percutaneous coronary intervention extent, complexity and platelet reactivity on outcomes after drug-eluting stent implantation Invasive Versus Medical Management in Patients With Prior Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery With a Non-ST Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial Outcome of Applying the ESC 0/1-hour Algorithm in Patients With Suspected Myocardial Infarction Pulmonary Artery Pressure-Guided Management of Patients With Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction Incidence, predictors, and outcomes of DAPT disruption due to non-compliance vs. bleeding after PCI: insights from the PARIS Registry Hs-cTroponins for the prediction of recurrent cardiovascular events in patients with established CHD - A comparative analysis from the KAROLA study Shock Team Approach in Refractory Cardiogenic Shock Requiring Short-Term Mechanical Circulatory Support: A Proof of Concept

Review Article2012 Nov 22;8(7):855-65.

JOURNAL:EuroIntervention. Article Link

Comparison of intravascular ultrasound versus angiography-guided drug-eluting stent implantation: a meta-analysis of one randomised trial and ten observational studies involving 19,619 patients

Zhang JY, Farooq V, Chen SL et al. Keywords: intravascular ultrasound; drug-eluting stent; angiography; major adverse cardiac events; stent thrombosis

ABSTRACT


AIMS - The impact of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guided coronary drug-eluting stent(DES) implantation on clinical outcomes remains controversial. A meta-analysis of the currently available clinical trials investigating IVUS-guided DES implantation was undertaken.


METHODS AND RESULTS - We searched Medline, the Cochrane Library and other internet sources, without language or date restrictions, for published articles comparing clinical outcomes between IVUS-guided and angiography-guided DES implantation. Clinical studies with both adjusted and unadjusted data were included. Eleven studies were identified (one randomised controlled trial and 10 registries) and included in the meta-analysis with a weighted follow-up time of 20.7 ± 11.5 months. Compared with angiography guidance, IVUS-guided DES implantation was associated with a reduced incidence of death (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.59, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.48-0.73, p<0.001), major adverse cardiac events (HR: 0.87, 95% CI: 0.78-0.96, p=0.008) and stent thrombosis (HR: 0.58, 95% CI: 0.44-0.77, p<0.001). The incidence of myocardial infarction (HR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.63-1.06, p=0.126), target lesion (HR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.73-1.11, p=0.316) and target vessel (HR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.77-1.05, p=0.195) revascularisation was comparable between the angiography and IVUS-guided arms. A repeat meta-analysis of propensity-matched studies only (six studies, n=5,300) yielded broadly similar results in terms of clinical outcomes.


CONCLUSIONS - IVUS-guided coronary DES implantationis associated with a significant reduction in death, MACE and stent thrombosis compared to angiography guidance. Appropriately powered randomised trials are necessary to confirm the findings from this meta-analysis.