CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Ticagrelor With or Without Aspirin in High-Risk Patients With Diabetes Mellitus Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Revascularization of left main coronary artery Acute Coronary Syndrome, Antiplatelet Therapy, and Bleeding: A Clinical Perspective Guideline Update on Indications for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Based on the 2020 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Guidelines for Management of Valvular Heart Disease Pooled Analysis of Bleeding, Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events, and All-Cause Mortality in Clinical Trials of Time-Constrained Dual-Antiplatelet Therapy After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Antibody-Based Ticagrelor Reversal Agent in Healthy Volunteers Low Endothelial Shear Stress Predicts Evolution to High-Risk Coronary Plaque Phenotype in the Future: A Serial Optical Coherence Tomography and Computational Fluid Dynamics Study Dual-Antiplatelet Therapy Cessation and Cardiovascular Risk in Relation to Age: Analysis From the PARIS Registry Left Main Revascularization in 2017: Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting or Percutaneous Coronary Intervention? Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in elective percutaneous coronary intervention (ALPHEUS): a randomised, open-label, phase 3b trial

Review Article2014 Mar;7(3):233-43.

JOURNAL:JACC Cardiovasc Interv. Article Link

Intravascular ultrasound-guided implantation of drug-eluting stents to improve outcome: a meta-analysis

Jang JS, Song YJ, Kang W et al. Keywords: drug-eluting stent(s); intravascular ultrasound; percutaneous coronary intervention

ABSTRACT


OBJECTIVES - The aim of this study was to systematically review and perform a meta-analysis of randomized trials and observational studies of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)-guided versus angiography-guided implantation of drug-eluting stents (DES).


BACKGROUND - Although studies in the bare-metal stents era suggested that there were clinical benefits to IVUS guidance, it is still controversial whether percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with DES guided by IVUS leads to better clinical outcomes.


METHODS - Relevant studies published through March 31, 2013, were searched for and identified in the electronic databases. Summary estimates were obtained using a random-effects model.


RESULTS - From 138 initial citations, 3 randomized trials and 12 observational studies with 24,849 patients (11,793 IVUS-guided and 13,056 angiography-guided) were included in this study. Comparison of IVUS- versus angiography-guided PCI disclosed odds ratios (ORs) for major adverse cardiac events of 0.79 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.69 to 0.91; p = 0.001). IVUS-guided PCI was also associated with significantly lower rates of all-cause mortality (OR: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.51 to 0.81; p < 0.001), myocardial infarction (OR: 0.57; 95% CI: 0.42 to 0.78; p < 0.001), target vessel revascularization (OR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.68 to 0.95; p = 0.01), and stent thrombosis (OR: 0.59; 95% CI: 0.42 to 0.82; p = 0.002). A meta-analysis of propensity-matched studies demonstrated similar results in terms of clinical outcomes, but not repeat revascularization.


CONCLUSIONS - IVUS-guided DES implantation is associated with significantly lower rates of adverse clinical events compared with angiography guidance. Further study is needed to clarify which subgroups of subjects with IVUS guidance will have greater benefit.



Copyright © 2014 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.