CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Left Main Revascularization in 2017: Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting or Percutaneous Coronary Intervention? Left Main Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Patients With Prior Cerebrovascular Disease: Results From the EXCEL Trial Safety and Efficacy of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement With Continuation of Vitamin K Antagonists or Direct Oral Anticoagulants Outcomes in patients treated with ticagrelor or clopidogrel after acute myocardial infarction: experiences from SWEDEHEART registry Rationale and design of the comparison between a P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy versus dual antiplatelet therapy in patients undergoing implantation of coronary drug-eluting stents (SMART-CHOICE): A prospective multicenter randomized trial Efficacy and Safety of Ticagrelor Monotherapy in Patients Undergoing Multivessel PCI Use of Risk Assessment Tools to Guide Decision-Making in the Primary Prevention of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease : A Special Report From the American Heart Association and American College of Cardiology SR-B1 Drives Endothelial Cell LDL Transcytosis via DOCK4 to Promote Atherosclerosis A Platelet Function Modulator of Thrombin Activation Is Causally Linked to Cardiovascular Disease and Affects PAR4 Receptor Signaling Sox17 Controls Emergence and Remodeling of Nestin-Expressing Coronary Vessels

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.