CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Management of two major complications in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory: the no-reflow phenomenon and coronary perforations Advances in Coronary No-Reflow Phenomenon-a Contemporary Review A Randomized Trial Comparing the NeoVas Sirolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Scaffold and Metallic Everolimus-Eluting Stents Homeostatic Chemokines and Prognosis in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes Better Prognosis After Complete Revascularization Using Contemporary Coronary Stents in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease Long-Term Effect of Ultrathin-Strut Versus Thin-Strut Drug-Eluting Stents in Patients With Small Vessel Coronary Artery Disease Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Subgroup Analysis of the BIOSCIENCE Randomized Trial Management of Patients With NSTE-ACS: A Comparison of the Recent AHA/ACC and ESC Guidelines Radionuclide Image-Guided Repair of the Heart A Randomized Trial to Assess Regional Left Ventricular Function After Stent Implantation in Chronic Total Occlusion The REVASC Trial Percutaneous Support Devices for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
|<<... 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 ...>>|

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.
>CBS CBS 2019

> CBS 2019

> CBS 2019 注册

> CBS 2019 会议日程

> CBS 2019 学术征集

> CBS 2019 热点

 CBSMD

> CBSMD 网站注册

> 教育中心

> 荐读文献

> Top 10 阅读文献

> 文献导读
CBS 2019 CBS 2019 主席团 教育中心 科研动态
Copyright ⓒ CBS MD Nanjing China. All rights reserved. 京ICP备16025898号-11
联系我们| Top