Why the study?
Does optical coherence tomography (OCT) improve the assessment and management of stable coronary lesions compared to conventional imaging?
Does optical coherence tomography (OCT) improve the assessment and management of stable coronary lesions compared to conventional imaging?
OCT is a valuable high-resolution imaging tool for assessing stable coronary lesions and guiding complex interventional procedures when angiography is limited.
OCT enhances plaque visualization in stable lesions; leaves open routine adoption without outcome trials.
This article discusses the current value of optical coherence tomography (OCT) for the assessment of stable coronary lesions. OCT generates intracoronary images with unprecedented image resolution, namely a 10‐fold higher image resolution compared to conventional intravascular ultrasound. OCT is able to visualize a variety of atherosclerotic plaques features that have been associated with rapid lesion progression and clinical events. There is broad agreement that the detailed, easy accessible, and interpretable information of OCT on the presence of atherosclerosis, its extent, lumen narrowing, as well as on the result of any interventional measure can be of clinical value, at least in individual patients and in specific clinical scenarios. Preliminary data indicate that OCT can change the operator's intention‐to‐treat and modify the overall revascularization strategy, potentially avoiding unnecessary interventional procedures. OCT might be efficient in complex interventions including treatment of long lesions, diffuse disease, bifurcations, as well as in all cases of angiographically ambiguous lesions. As such, OCT might emerge, next to its undisputed position in research, as tool of choice in all clinical scenarios where angiography is limited by its nature as two‐dimensional luminogram. Answer questions and earn CME: https://wileyhealthlearning.com/Activity2/4279893/Activity.aspx
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Regar et al. (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: