Why the study?
Coronary bifurcation lesions are associated with higher rates of major adverse cardiac events, leading investigators to evaluate the impact of imaging-guided PCI in a real-world population.
Does intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guidance reduce MACE compared to angiographic guidance in patients with coronary bifurcation lesions undergoing PCI?
Does intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guidance reduce MACE compared to angiographic guidance in patients with coronary bifurcation lesions undergoing PCI?
IVUS guidance during PCI for coronary bifurcation lesions is associated with reduced MACE specifically in unprotected left main disease, but not in non-left main bifurcations.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
IVUS guidance was associated with lower MACE in ULM bifurcations; hypothesis-generating and requires randomized confirmation before practice change.
BACKGROUND: Bifurcation lesions are associated with higher rates of major adverse cardiac events (MACE). AIM: To investigate the impact of imaging-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in a real-world population with coronary bifurcation lesions. METHODS AND RESULTS: From the ULTRA-BIFURCAT registry, we compared intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) vs. angiographic guidance in a cohort of 3486 propensity matched patients. MACE, a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), target-lesion revascularization, and stent thrombosis was the primary endpoint. Subgroup analyses were performed for unprotected left main (ULM) and non-ULM disease. PSM generated 1743 pairs. MACE occurred in 154 (9%) patients in the IVUS-guided group and in 199 (11%) patients in the angio-guided group (P = 0.09). IVUS guidance was associated with lower MACE in the ULM population [hazard ratio (HR) 0.62, 95% confidence internal (CI) 0.46-0.83], but had no impact in the non-ULM population (HR 1.12, 95% CI 0.83-1.51), P for interaction = 0.006. IVUS was associated with a reduction in all-MI (HR 0.32, 95% CI 0.16-0.64) in the ULM population and with lower stent thrombosis (ST) in the non-ULM population (HR 0.24, 95% CI 0.08-0.71). Provisional stenting was associated with lower MACE in the ULM population (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.45-0.98), whereas kissing balloon (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.56-0.99) and ultra-thin stents (HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.29-0.67) were protective factors in the non-ULM population. CONCLUSION: In a real-world scenario, IVUS guidance during drug eluting stent (DES) implantation is associated with a lower rate of MACE in patients with ULM coronary bifurcation lesions. In non-ULM bifurcations, no difference was observed on MACE, while IVUS guidance was associated with a lower rate of ST.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bruno et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: