» Articles » PMID: 36172967

Impact of Intracoronary Imaging-Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention on Procedural Outcomes Among Complex Patient Groups

Overview
Date 2022 Sep 29
PMID 36172967
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background Intracoronary imaging (ICI) has been shown to improve survival after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Whether this prognostic benefit is sustained across different indications remains unclear. Methods and Results All PCI procedures performed in England and Wales between April, 2014 and March 31, 2020, were retrospectively analyzed. The association between ICI use and in-hospital major acute cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events; composite of all-cause mortality, stroke, and reinfarction and mortality was examined using multivariable logistic regression analysis for different imaging-recommended indications as set by European Association for Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions consensus. Of 555 398 PCI procedures, 10.8% (n=59 752) were ICI-guided. ICI use doubled between 2014 (7.8%) and 2020 (17.5%) and was highest in left main PCI (41.2%) and lowest in acute coronary syndrome (9%). Only specific European Association for Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions imaging-recommended indications were associated with reduced major acute cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events and mortality, including left main PCI (odds ratio [OR], 0.45 [95% CI, 0.39-0.52] and 0.41 [95% CI, 0.35-0.48], respectively), acute coronary syndrome (OR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.70-0.82] and 0.70 [95% CI, 0.63-0.77]), and stent length >60 mm (OR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.59-0.94] and 0.72 [95% CI, 0.54-0.95]). Stent thrombosis and renal failure were associated with lower mortality (OR, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.52-0.91]) and major acute cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (OR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.60-0.99]), respectively. Conclusions ICI use has more than doubled over a 7-year period at a national level but remains low, with <1 in 5 procedures performed under ICI guidance. In-hospital survival was better with ICI-guided than angiography-guided PCI, albeit only for specific indications.

Citing Articles

Racial/Ethnic, Sex, and Economic Disparities in the Utilization and Outcomes of Intracoronary Imaging.

Ismayl M, Ahmed H, Goldsweig A, Alkhouli M, Prasad A, Guerrero M J Soc Cardiovasc Angiogr Interv. 2024; 3(6):101936.

PMID: 39132585 PMC: 11308510. DOI: 10.1016/j.jscai.2024.101936.


Intracoronary Imaging in Percutaneous Coronary Interventions: The Eye Cannot Appreciate What It Cannot See.

Zaman M, Rashid M, Mamas M J Soc Cardiovasc Angiogr Interv. 2024; 1(6):100517.

PMID: 39132360 PMC: 11308587. DOI: 10.1016/j.jscai.2022.100517.


Hospital-Level Variability in Use of Intracoronary Imaging for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the United States.

Malik A, Saxon J, Spertus J, Salisbury A, Grantham J, Kennedy K J Soc Cardiovasc Angiogr Interv. 2024; 2(4):100973.

PMID: 39131640 PMC: 11308136. DOI: 10.1016/j.jscai.2023.100973.


Intravascular Imaging-Guided Versus Angiography-Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials.

Sreenivasan J, Reddy R, Jamil Y, Malik A, Chamie D, Howard J J Am Heart Assoc. 2024; 13(2):e031111.

PMID: 38214263 PMC: 10926835. DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.123.031111.

References
1.
Yang Y, George K, Luo R, Cheng Y, Shang W, Ge S . Contrast-induced acute kidney injury and adverse clinical outcomes risk in acute coronary syndrome patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a meta-analysis. BMC Nephrol. 2018; 19(1):374. PMC: 6303898. DOI: 10.1186/s12882-018-1161-5. View

2.
Okamura T, Onuma Y, Garcia-Garcia H, van Geuns R, Wykrzykowska J, Schultz C . First-in-man evaluation of intravascular optical frequency domain imaging (OFDI) of Terumo: a comparison with intravascular ultrasound and quantitative coronary angiography. EuroIntervention. 2011; 6(9):1037-45. DOI: 10.4244/EIJV6I9A182. View

3.
Ye Y, Yang M, Zhang S, Zeng Y . Percutaneous coronary intervention in left main coronary artery disease with or without intravascular ultrasound: A meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2017; 12(6):e0179756. PMC: 5481000. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0179756. View

4.
Koskinas K, Nakamura M, Raber L, Colleran R, Kadota K, Capodanno D . Current use of intracoronary imaging in interventional practice - Results of a European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) and Japanese Association of Cardiovascular Interventions and Therapeutics (CVIT) Clinical.... EuroIntervention. 2018; 14(4):e475-e484. DOI: 10.4244/EIJY18M03_01. View

5.
Koskinas K, Ughi G, Windecker S, Tearney G, Raber L . Intracoronary imaging of coronary atherosclerosis: validation for diagnosis, prognosis and treatment. Eur Heart J. 2015; 37(6):524-35a-c. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehv642. View