Effects of Intravascular Ultrasound–Guided Versus Angiography-Guided New-Generation Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation: Meta-Analysis With Individual Patient–Level Data From 2,345 Randomized Patients

Dong Ho Shin, Sung Jin Hong, Gary S. Mintz, Jung Sun Kim, Byeong Keuk Kim, Young Guk Ko, Donghoon Choi, Yangsoo Jang, Myeongki Hong

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

30 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical usefulness of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)–guided new-generation drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation using a meta-analysis of individual patient–level data from randomized trials. Background Published randomized trials that compare IVUS-guided versus angiography-guided new-generation DES implantation are scarce. Methods Searches of the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases were performed to find randomized trials that compared IVUS-guided versus angiography-guided new-generation DES implantation. A total of 2,345 patients from 3 randomized trials were identified, and all patients were treated for long lesions or chronic total occlusions. Individual patient–level data were obtained. The primary endpoint was a major adverse cardiac event, a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis. An intention-to-treat analysis and per protocol analysis were performed. Results By 1 year post-procedure, major adverse cardiac events had occurred in 0.4% of the patients who underwent IVUS-guided DES implantation versus 1.2% of those who underwent angiography-guided DES implantation (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.36; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.13 to 0.99; p = 0.040). For the IVUS-guided group, favorable clinical outcomes were observed for myocardial infarction (0% vs. 0.4%; HR: 0.09; p = 0.026). In addition, the clinical benefit of IVUS guidance was stronger in the per protocol analysis (HR: 0.32; 95% CI: 0.12 to 0.89; p = 0.021). Conclusions Compared with angiographic guidance, IVUS-guided new-generation DES implantation was associated with favorable outcomes in terms of major adverse cardiac events, the composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis. These findings must be interpreted only for complex lesions, because all identified patients had long lesions or chronic total occlusions.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)2232-2239
Number of pages8
JournalJACC: Cardiovascular Interventions
Volume9
Issue number21
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2016 Nov 14

Fingerprint

Drug-Eluting Stents
Meta-Analysis
Angiography
Myocardial Infarction
Stents
Thrombosis
Confidence Intervals
Intention to Treat Analysis
MEDLINE
Databases

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

@article{c8b202e84016464d9ab446a1738dcb5d,
title = "Effects of Intravascular Ultrasound–Guided Versus Angiography-Guided New-Generation Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation: Meta-Analysis With Individual Patient–Level Data From 2,345 Randomized Patients",
abstract = "Objectives The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical usefulness of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)–guided new-generation drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation using a meta-analysis of individual patient–level data from randomized trials. Background Published randomized trials that compare IVUS-guided versus angiography-guided new-generation DES implantation are scarce. Methods Searches of the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases were performed to find randomized trials that compared IVUS-guided versus angiography-guided new-generation DES implantation. A total of 2,345 patients from 3 randomized trials were identified, and all patients were treated for long lesions or chronic total occlusions. Individual patient–level data were obtained. The primary endpoint was a major adverse cardiac event, a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis. An intention-to-treat analysis and per protocol analysis were performed. Results By 1 year post-procedure, major adverse cardiac events had occurred in 0.4{\%} of the patients who underwent IVUS-guided DES implantation versus 1.2{\%} of those who underwent angiography-guided DES implantation (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.36; 95{\%} confidence interval [CI]: 0.13 to 0.99; p = 0.040). For the IVUS-guided group, favorable clinical outcomes were observed for myocardial infarction (0{\%} vs. 0.4{\%}; HR: 0.09; p = 0.026). In addition, the clinical benefit of IVUS guidance was stronger in the per protocol analysis (HR: 0.32; 95{\%} CI: 0.12 to 0.89; p = 0.021). Conclusions Compared with angiographic guidance, IVUS-guided new-generation DES implantation was associated with favorable outcomes in terms of major adverse cardiac events, the composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis. These findings must be interpreted only for complex lesions, because all identified patients had long lesions or chronic total occlusions.",
author = "Shin, {Dong Ho} and Hong, {Sung Jin} and Mintz, {Gary S.} and Kim, {Jung Sun} and Kim, {Byeong Keuk} and Ko, {Young Guk} and Donghoon Choi and Yangsoo Jang and Myeongki Hong",
year = "2016",
month = "11",
day = "14",
doi = "10.1016/j.jcin.2016.07.021",
language = "English",
volume = "9",
pages = "2232--2239",
journal = "JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions",
issn = "1936-8798",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "21",

}

Effects of Intravascular Ultrasound–Guided Versus Angiography-Guided New-Generation Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation : Meta-Analysis With Individual Patient–Level Data From 2,345 Randomized Patients. / Shin, Dong Ho; Hong, Sung Jin; Mintz, Gary S.; Kim, Jung Sun; Kim, Byeong Keuk; Ko, Young Guk; Choi, Donghoon; Jang, Yangsoo; Hong, Myeongki.

In: JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions, Vol. 9, No. 21, 14.11.2016, p. 2232-2239.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Effects of Intravascular Ultrasound–Guided Versus Angiography-Guided New-Generation Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation

T2 - Meta-Analysis With Individual Patient–Level Data From 2,345 Randomized Patients

AU - Shin, Dong Ho

AU - Hong, Sung Jin

AU - Mintz, Gary S.

AU - Kim, Jung Sun

AU - Kim, Byeong Keuk

AU - Ko, Young Guk

AU - Choi, Donghoon

AU - Jang, Yangsoo

AU - Hong, Myeongki

PY - 2016/11/14

Y1 - 2016/11/14

N2 - Objectives The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical usefulness of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)–guided new-generation drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation using a meta-analysis of individual patient–level data from randomized trials. Background Published randomized trials that compare IVUS-guided versus angiography-guided new-generation DES implantation are scarce. Methods Searches of the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases were performed to find randomized trials that compared IVUS-guided versus angiography-guided new-generation DES implantation. A total of 2,345 patients from 3 randomized trials were identified, and all patients were treated for long lesions or chronic total occlusions. Individual patient–level data were obtained. The primary endpoint was a major adverse cardiac event, a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis. An intention-to-treat analysis and per protocol analysis were performed. Results By 1 year post-procedure, major adverse cardiac events had occurred in 0.4% of the patients who underwent IVUS-guided DES implantation versus 1.2% of those who underwent angiography-guided DES implantation (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.36; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.13 to 0.99; p = 0.040). For the IVUS-guided group, favorable clinical outcomes were observed for myocardial infarction (0% vs. 0.4%; HR: 0.09; p = 0.026). In addition, the clinical benefit of IVUS guidance was stronger in the per protocol analysis (HR: 0.32; 95% CI: 0.12 to 0.89; p = 0.021). Conclusions Compared with angiographic guidance, IVUS-guided new-generation DES implantation was associated with favorable outcomes in terms of major adverse cardiac events, the composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis. These findings must be interpreted only for complex lesions, because all identified patients had long lesions or chronic total occlusions.

AB - Objectives The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical usefulness of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)–guided new-generation drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation using a meta-analysis of individual patient–level data from randomized trials. Background Published randomized trials that compare IVUS-guided versus angiography-guided new-generation DES implantation are scarce. Methods Searches of the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases were performed to find randomized trials that compared IVUS-guided versus angiography-guided new-generation DES implantation. A total of 2,345 patients from 3 randomized trials were identified, and all patients were treated for long lesions or chronic total occlusions. Individual patient–level data were obtained. The primary endpoint was a major adverse cardiac event, a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis. An intention-to-treat analysis and per protocol analysis were performed. Results By 1 year post-procedure, major adverse cardiac events had occurred in 0.4% of the patients who underwent IVUS-guided DES implantation versus 1.2% of those who underwent angiography-guided DES implantation (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.36; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.13 to 0.99; p = 0.040). For the IVUS-guided group, favorable clinical outcomes were observed for myocardial infarction (0% vs. 0.4%; HR: 0.09; p = 0.026). In addition, the clinical benefit of IVUS guidance was stronger in the per protocol analysis (HR: 0.32; 95% CI: 0.12 to 0.89; p = 0.021). Conclusions Compared with angiographic guidance, IVUS-guided new-generation DES implantation was associated with favorable outcomes in terms of major adverse cardiac events, the composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis. These findings must be interpreted only for complex lesions, because all identified patients had long lesions or chronic total occlusions.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84994453201&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84994453201&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jcin.2016.07.021

DO - 10.1016/j.jcin.2016.07.021

M3 - Article

C2 - 27744039

AN - SCOPUS:84994453201

VL - 9

SP - 2232

EP - 2239

JO - JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions

JF - JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions

SN - 1936-8798

IS - 21

ER -