In-hospital outcomes of angiography versus intravascular ultrasound-guided percutaneous coronary intervention in ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients

Khalid, Mazin; Patel, Neelkumar; Amgai, Birendra; Bakhit, Ahmed; Khalid, Mowyad; Kafle, Paritosh; Chakraborty, Sanjoy; Gayam, Vijay; Mukhtar, Osama; Malyshev, Yuri; Hashmi, Arsalan Talib; Patel, Jignesh; Shani, Jacob; Patel, Vinod F.

doi:10.1080/20009666.2020.1800970

Cited by 8 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…1) [12,13,[21][22][23][24][25][26][27]. One eligible record was excluded because the study population was also part of a larger included study by Ya'qoub et al [26,28]…”

Section: Search Results and Study Selection Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intravascular ultrasound-guided versus coronary angiography-guided percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute myocardial infarction: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Groenland¹,

Neleman²,

Kakar³

et al. 2022

International Journal of Cardiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) can overcome the intrinsic limitations of coronary angiography for lesion assessment and stenting. IVUS improves outcomes of patients presenting with stable or complex coronary artery disease, but dedicated data on the impact of IVUS-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remains scarce. Methods: We systematically searched Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Google Scholar for studies that compared clinical outcomes for IVUS-versus angio-guided PCI in patients with AMI. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality and the secondary endpoint major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model was used to calculate pooled risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: Nine studies (8 observational, 1 RCT) with a total of 838.902 patients (796.953 angio-guided PCI, 41.949 IVUS-guided PCI) were included. In patients with AMI, IVUS-guided PCI was associated with a significantly lower risk of all-cause mortality (pooled RR: 0.70; 95% CI, 0.59-0.82; p < 0.01), MACE (pooled RR: 0.86; 95% CI, 0.74-0.99; p = 0.04) and target vessel revascularization (TVR) (pooled RR: 0.83; 95% CI, 0.73-0.95; p < 0.01). In the subset of patients presenting with ST-segment elevation, IVUS-guided PCI remained associated with a reduced risk for both all-cause mortality (pooled RR: 0.79; 95% CI, 0.66-0.95, p = 0.01) and MACE (pooled RR: 0.86; 95% CI, 0.74-0.99, p = 0.04). Conclusions: This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis comparing IVUS-versus angio-guided PCI in patients with AMI, showing a beneficial effect of IVUS-guided PCI on all-cause mortality, MACE and TVR. Results of ongoing dedicated prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings.

show abstract

“…1) [12,13,[21][22][23][24][25][26][27]. One eligible record was excluded because the study population was also part of a larger included study by Ya'qoub et al [26,28]…”

Section: Search Results and Study Selection Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intravascular ultrasound-guided versus coronary angiography-guided percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute myocardial infarction: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Groenland¹,

Neleman²,

Kakar³

et al. 2022

International Journal of Cardiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…1) [12,13,[20][21][22][23][24][25][26]. One eligible record was excluded because the study population was also part of a larger included study by Ya'qoub et al [25,27]…”

Section: Search Results and Study Selection Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intravascular Ultrasound-Guided Versus Coronary Angiography-Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Groenland

Neleman

Kakar

et al. 2022

Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Moreover, in the IVUS-guided PCI group, the patients with optimal stent implantation revealed a signi cantly lower incidence of TVF compared to those with suboptimal stent implantation (1.6% vs. 4.4%; hazard ratio 0.35) [19]. Although no randomized controlled trial (RCT) have investigated the intracoronary imaging guidance in the setting of STEMI, the national database in the United States and a recent registry study in the United Kingdom reported that the number of intracoronary imaging use in patients presenting with ACS has steadily been increasing [20,21].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison between Optical Coherence Tomography and Intravascular Ultrasound in Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for ST-segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction

Matsuwaki

Muramatsu

Ota

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Optical coherence tomography (OCT) may have advantages in not only identifying etiology but also optimizing stent implantation due to its higher spatial resolution compared to intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) in contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute coronary syndrome. However, the impact of OCT-guided PCI on clinical outcomes in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) has been scarcely reported.Methods: We retrospectively studied consecutive 533 patients presenting with STEMI who underwent either OCT-guided or IVUS-guided primary PCI (within 12 h from symptom onset) between June 2016 and December 2020. The primary endpoint was a target lesion failure (TLF), including cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction (re-infarction), or target lesion revascularization. Propensity score (PS) matching was performed for fair comparisons between OCT-guided and IVUS-guided PCI.Results: The patients were younger, and left ventricular ejection fraction and estimated glomerular filtration rate were significantly higher in the OCT group (166 patients, 31.1%) than in the IVUS group (367 patients, 68.9%). Killip class IV and left main disease were more common in the IVUS group than in the OCT group, while the peak level of creatine kinase was comparable between the two groups (median; 1,953 vs 1,603 U/L). Contrast volume was significantly higher in the OCT group than in the IVUS group (200 vs. 165 mL; p < 0.001). The cumulative incidence of TLF within median 2.2 years did not differ between the OCT and the IVUS groups (9.6% vs. 13.4%; p = 0.218), whereas cardiac mortality was significantly higher in the IVUS group than in the OCT group (8.7% vs. 3.6%; p = 0.040). After the PS matching (166 patients in each group), no differences in TLF and other clinical outcome measures were observed between the two groups.Conclusions: OCT-guided PCI showed comparable clinical outcomes with IVUS-guided PCI in selected patients presenting with STEMI.

show abstract

In-hospital outcomes of angiography versus intravascular ultrasound-guided percutaneous coronary intervention in ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients

Abstract: (2020) In-hospital outcomes of angiography versus intravascular ultrasound-guided percutaneous coronary intervention in ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients,

Cited by 8 publications

References 21 publications

Intravascular ultrasound-guided versus coronary angiography-guided percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute myocardial infarction: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Intravascular ultrasound-guided versus coronary angiography-guided percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute myocardial infarction: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Intravascular Ultrasound-Guided Versus Coronary Angiography-Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Comparison between Optical Coherence Tomography and Intravascular Ultrasound in Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for ST-segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About