» Articles » PMID: 39131640

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

Overview
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Intracoronary (IC) imaging for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is associated with better patient outcomes and carries a class IIA guideline recommendation, but it remains rarely used. We sought to characterize hospital-level variability in IC imaging for PCI in the United States and to identify factors that may explain this variability.

Methods: Patients who underwent PCI, with or without IC imaging, in the Nationwide Readmissions Database (2016-2020) were included. A regression model with a random effect for site was used to generate the median odds ratio (MOR) of IC imaging use for a patient at one site vs another, sequentially adjusting for procedural, patient, and hospital factors to examine the extent to which different factors account for this variability.

Results: The analytic cohort included 1,328,517 PCI procedures (patient mean age 65.8 years, 32.4% female, IC imaging used in 9.2%) at 1068 hospitals. The median hospital use of IC imaging increased from 2.7% (IQR, 0.6-7.7) in 2016 to 6.3% (IQR, 1.7-17.8) in 2020. In 2020, the MOR for IC imaging during PCI was 4.6 (IQR, 4.3-5.0), indicating a >4-fold difference in the odds of a patient undergoing IC imaging with PCI at one random hospital vs another. Adjusting for procedure, patient, and hospital factors did not meaningfully alter the MOR.

Conclusion: The average US hospital uses IC imaging for <1 in 15 PCI procedures, with marked variability across hospitals. Strategies to increase and standardize the use of IC imaging are needed to improve the quality of PCI in the United States.

Citing Articles

Management of Stent Underexpansion and Aorto-ostial Lesions.

Paolucci L, Shabbir A, Lombardi M, Jeronimo A, Escaned J, Gonzalo N Interv Cardiol. 2025; 19():e26.

PMID: 39872904 PMC: 11770534. DOI: 10.15420/icr.2024.10.


Utilization and Outcomes Associated With Intravascular Ultrasound During Abdominal and Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Interventions in the United States in the Contemporary Era (2016-2023).

Mosarla R, Heindel P, Hussain M, Schermerhorn M, Kuno T, DOria M Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2024; 18(1):e014332.

PMID: 39727070 PMC: 11748908. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.124.014332.


Image-guided percutaneous revascularization of the coronary arteries.

Alasnag M, Bardooli F, Johnson T, Truesdell A Eur Heart J Imaging Methods Pract. 2024; 2(3):qyae122.

PMID: 39664726 PMC: 11632525. DOI: 10.1093/ehjimp/qyae122.


Fractional flow reserve versus intravascular ultrasound during percutaneous intervention.

Ahmed H, Ismayl M, Palicherla A, Kalathil R, Patterson C, Pusapati S Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2024; 86(11):6361-6363.

PMID: 39525736 PMC: 11543201. DOI: 10.1097/MS9.0000000000002313.


State-of-art review: intravascular imaging in percutaneous coronary interventions.

Nafee T, Shah A, Forsberg M, Zheng J, Ou J Cardiol Plus. 2024; 8(4):227-246.

PMID: 38304487 PMC: 10829907. DOI: 10.1097/CP9.0000000000000069.

References
1.
Madder R, Seth M, Sukul D, Alraies M, Qureshi M, Tucciarone M . Rates of Intracoronary Imaging Optimization in Contemporary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Report From the BMC2 Registry. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2022; 15(10):e012182. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.122.012182. View

2.
Zhang H, Mu L, Hu S, Nallamothu B, Lansky A, Xu B . Comparison of Physician Visual Assessment With Quantitative Coronary Angiography in Assessment of Stenosis Severity in China. JAMA Intern Med. 2018; 178(2):239-247. PMC: 5838612. DOI: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.7821. View

3.
Maehara A, Mintz G, Witzenbichler B, Weisz G, Neumann F, Rinaldi M . Relationship Between Intravascular Ultrasound Guidance and Clinical Outcomes After Drug-Eluting Stents. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2018; 11(11):e006243. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.117.006243. View

4.
Raber L, Mintz G, Koskinas K, Johnson T, Holm N, Onuma Y . Clinical use of intracoronary imaging. Part 1: guidance and optimization of coronary interventions. An expert consensus document of the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions. EuroIntervention. 2018; 14(6):656-677. DOI: 10.4244/EIJY18M06_01. View

5.
Megaly M, Pershad A, Glogoza M, Elbadawi A, Omer M, Saad M . Use of Intravascular Imaging in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Acute Myocardial Infarction. Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2020; 30:59-64. DOI: 10.1016/j.carrev.2020.09.032. View