CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Readmissions Where Are the Solutions? Know Diabetes by Heart: A Partnership to Improve Cardiovascular Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Multivessel PCI Guided by FFR or Angiography for Myocardial Infarction Lack of Association Between Heart Failure and Incident Cancer Imaging Coronary Anatomy and Reducing Myocardial Infarction Open sesame technique in percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction Deficiency of GATA3-Positive Macrophages Improves Cardiac Function Following Myocardial Infarction or Pressure Overload Hypertrophy High-Sensitivity Troponin and The Application of Risk Stratification Thresholds in Patients with Suspected Acute Coronary Syndrome Fractional flow reserve vs. angiography in guiding management to optimize outcomes in non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: the British Heart Foundation FAMOUS-NSTEMI randomized trial Optimal medical therapy vs. coronary revascularization for patients presenting with chronic total occlusion: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity score adjusted studies

Original Research2011 Nov;100(11):1021-8.

JOURNAL:Clin Res Cardiol. Article Link

Is intravascular ultrasound beneficial for percutaneous coronary intervention of bifurcation lesions? Evidence from a 4,314-patient registry

Biondi-Zoccai G, Sheiban I, Romagnoli E et al. Keywords: IVUS guided PCI; bifurcation lesions; DES; outcome

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND - Coronary bifurcations remain a challenging lesion subset for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). It is unclear whether intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guidance can improve PCI results in bifurcations. We aimed to compare IVUS-guided PCI versus standard PCI in a large registry of patients undergoing PCI for bifurcations in the drug-eluting stent era.


METHODS - A multicenter, retrospective study was conducted enrolling consecutive patients undergoing bifurcation PCI between January 2002 and December 2006 at 22 centers. The primary end-point was the long term rate of major adverse cardiac events [MACE, i.e. death, myocardial infarction or target lesion revascularization (TLR)].


RESULTS - A total of 4,314 patients were included, 226 (5.2%) undergoing IVUS-guided PCI, and 4,088 (94.8%) standard PCI. Early (30-day) outcomes were similar in the two groups, with MACE in 1.3 versus 2.1%, respectively, death in 0.9 versus 1.0%, and stent thrombosis in 0 versus 0.6% (all p > 0.05). After 24 ± 15 months, unadjusted rates of MACE were 17.7 versus 16.4%, with death in 2.7 versus 4.9%, myocardial infarction in 4.4 versus 3.7%, TLR in 15.0 versus 12.3%, and stent thrombosis in 3.1 versus 2.7% (all p > 0.05). Even at multivariable Cox proportional hazard analysis with propensity score adjustment, IVUS was not associated with any statistically significant impact on the risk of MACE, death, myocardial infarction, TLR (neither on the main branch nor on the side branch), or stent thrombosis (all p > 0.05).


CONCLUSIONS - Despite a sound rationale to choose stent size, optimize stent expansion and guide kissing inflation, IVUS usage during PCI for coronary bifurcation lesions was not associated with significant clinical benefits in this large retrospective study.