Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
PulseExploreClubsResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeClubsExplore
January 1, 2014Circulation JournalOpen Access

Clinical Utility and Significance of Intravascular Ultrasound and Optical Coherence Tomography in Guiding Percutaneous Coronary Interventions

View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Key result

Intravascular ultrasound and optical coherence tomography provide complementary information that facilitates pre-interventional lesion assessment and post-interventional stent optimization during PCI.

Why the study?

Does IVUS or OCT guidance improve clinical outcomes and procedural success in patients undergoing PCI compared to angiography guidance?

Population

Patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)

Comparison

Intravascular ultrasound and optical coherence… vs Angiography-guided PCI

Design

Review

Authors

KHKiyoshi HibiKKKazuo KimuraSUSatoshi Umemura

Discussion

Loading...

Member takes

Overview

May aid complex PCI lesion assessment; leaves open whether routine guidance improves outcomes versus angiography.

Structured PICO

Does IVUS or OCT guidance improve clinical outcomes and procedural success in patients undergoing PCI compared to angiography guidance?

P
Population
Patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)
I
Intervention
Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) guidance during PCI
C
Comparator
Angiography-guided PCI
O
Outcome
Incidence of target vessel revascularization, stent thrombosis, and myocardial infarction; procedural adverse events

IVUS and OCT provide complementary pre- and post-interventional assessments that can optimize PCI outcomes and predict adverse events like no-reflow and side-branch occlusion.

Limitations

  • There exist no standardized criteria for stent sizing or optimal procedural endpoints to guide stent implantation either by IVUS or OCT.
  • OCT has less tissue-penetration depth compared to IVUS and cannot deeply penetrate side branches.
  • Current FD-OCT systems require injection of high-dose contrast media, which may be deleterious in patients with chronic kidney disease.

Cite This Study

Hibi et al. (2014) conducted a review in Coronary artery disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) guided PCI vs. Angiography-guided PCI was evaluated. Intravascular ultrasound and optical coherence tomography provide complementary information that facilitates pre-interventional lesion assessment and post-interventional stent optimization during PCI.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a1aee6f37bfaf0f5945d601https://doi.org/10.1253/circj.cj-14-1044
View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Optical coherence tomography- vs. intravascular ultrasound-guided percutaneous coronary intervention2017 · 7 citations
  2. 2Modern Imaging Techniques for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Guidance: A Focus on Intravascular Ultrasound and Optical Coherence Tomography2025
  3. 3Intravascular Imaging Guidance for Percutaneous Coronary Interventions2025
  4. 4Intracoronary Imaging: Current Practice and Future Perspectives2023 · 9 citations
  5. 5Optical coherence tomography (OCT) vs intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) in diagnosing the mechanisms of in-stent restenosis in drug eluting stents2026