Impact of intravascular ultrasound‐guided stenting on long‐term clinical outcome: A meta‐analysis of available studies comparing intravascular ultrasound‐guided and angiographically guided stenting
- 18 June 2003
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions
- Vol. 59 (3) , 314-321
- https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.10537
Abstract
To date, only a few studies have compared the clinical efficacy of intracoronary ultrasound (IVUS)‐guided to angiographically guided stenting. Furthermore, it is not yet known whether the lower restenosis rate shown with the former strategy would translate into a substantial clinical advantage. Therefore, the aim of the present investigation was to improve the level of evidence of these studies by means of a formal meta‐analysis. Nine studies were considered suitable for analysis. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated for 6‐month clinical follow‐up. Primary endpoint was a composite of death and nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), as considered in every single study. Secondary endpoints were major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), according to single study definition, the individual cardiac events, as well as several pre‐ and postprocedure and follow‐up angiographic parameters. Overall, 2,972 patients were included. At 6 months, the OR for death and nonfatal MI was 1.13 (95% CI = 0.79–1.61; P = 0.5) for patients with IVUS‐guided stenting. However, patients with IVUS‐guided stenting had less target vessel revascularizations (OR = 0.62; 95% CI = 0.49–0.78; P = 0.00003) and MACEs (OR = 0.79; 95% CI = 0.64–0.98; P = 0.03) compared to angiographically guided stenting. In addition, subjects treated with IVUS‐guided stenting had significantly less binary restenosis (OR = 0.75; 95% CI = 0.60–0.94; P = 0.01). The present meta‐analysis demonstrates that IVUS‐guided stenting implantation has a neutral effect on long‐term death and nonfatal MI compared to an angiographic optimization. However, IVUS‐guided stenting significantly lowers 6‐month angiographic restenosis and target vessel revascularizations. Whether these benefits could be very helpful when dealing with lesions at high risk for restenosis is still an issue. Cathet Cardiovasc Intervent 2003;59:314–321.Keywords
This publication has 24 references indexed in Scilit:
- Randomized Comparison of Coronary Stent Implantation Under Ultrasound or Angiographic Guidance to Reduce Stent Restenosis (OPTICUS Study)Circulation, 2001
- Ultrasound-Guided Strategy for Provisional Stenting With Focal Balloon Combination CatheterCirculation, 2000
- Central Pulmonary Artery Lesions in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary DiseaseCirculation, 1999
- Randomised comparison of implantation of heparin-coated stents with balloon angioplasty in selected patients with coronary artery disease (Benestent II)The Lancet, 1998
- Impact of intravascular ultrasound guidance in stent deployment on 6-month restenosis rate: a multicenter, randomized study comparing two strategies—with and without intravascular ultrasound guidanceJournal of the American College of Cardiology, 1998
- Intracoronary Stent Implantation Without Ultrasound Guidance and With Replacement of Conventional Anticoagulation by Antiplatelet TherapyCirculation, 1996
- Utilization of the Coronary Balloon-Expandable Coil Stent Without Anticoagulation or Intravascular UltrasoundCirculation, 1996
- Intracoronary Stenting Without Anticoagulation Accomplished With Intravascular Ultrasound GuidanceCirculation, 1995
- A Comparison of Balloon-Expandable-Stent Implantation with Balloon Angioplasty in Patients with Coronary Artery DiseaseNew England Journal of Medicine, 1994
- A Randomized Comparison of Coronary-Stent Placement and Balloon Angioplasty in the Treatment of Coronary Artery DiseaseNew England Journal of Medicine, 1994