CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Thrombotic Versus Bleeding Risk After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: JACC Review Topic of the Week Diagnostic accuracy of cardiac positron emission tomography versus single photon emission computed tomography for coronary artery disease: a bivariate meta-analysis Osteoarthritis risk is reduced after treatment with ticagrelor compared to clopidogrel: a propensity score matching analysis Coronary calcium as a predictor of coronary events in four racial or ethnic groups Second vs. First generation drug eluting stents in multiple vessel disease and left main stenosis: Two-year follow-up of the observational, prospective, controlled, and multicenter ERACI IV registry Association Between Depressive Symptoms and Incident Cardiovascular Diseases Valve‐in‐Valve for Degenerated Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Versus Valve‐in‐Valve for Degenerated Surgical Aortic Bioprostheses: A 3‐Center Comparison of Hemodynamic and 1‐Year Outcome The role of integrated backscatter intravascular ultrasound in characterizing bare metal and drug-eluting stent restenotic neointima as compared to optical coherence tomography Long-term results after PCI of unprotected distal left main coronary artery stenosis: the Bifurcations Bad Krozingen (BBK)-Left Main Registry Impact of myocardial fibrosis on left ventricular remodelling, recovery, and outcome after transcatheter aortic valve implantation in different haemodynamic subtypes of severe aortic stenosis

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.