Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
INTRODUCTION: The use of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) in percutaneous revascularization of left-main coronary artery disease (LMCAD) warrants further exploration. We aimed to collate all available data on the merits of IVUS in LMCAD to help decision-making. METHODS: The MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases were queried for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational cohort studies (OCS). The data were analyzed using random-effects model to calculate unadjusted odds ratio (OR) between IVUS-guided and angiography-only LMCA revascularization. RESULTS: A total of 14 studies (2 RCTs and 12 OCS), comprising 18944 patients, were included. The pooled odds of all-cause mortality (OR 0.57, 95%CI 0.46-0.70, p = <0.00001), cardiovascular mortality (OR 0.37, 95%CI 0.26-0.54, p = <0.00001), left-main revascularization (OR 0.63, 95%CI 0.45-0.89, p = 0.009) and myocardial infarction (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.66-0.97, p = 0.02) were significantly lower with IVUS-guidance. There was no difference observed in the odds of the stent thrombosis (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.31-1.05, p = 0.07) and stroke (OR 1.7, 95%CI 0.56-5.14, p = 0.35) between the two groups. A subgroup analysis based on the study design and follow-up duration mirrored the pooled estimates. CONCLUSION: IVUS-guided LMCA intervention is associated with overall improved cardiovascular outcomes than the angiography-only approach. This needs to be tested in a large randomized controlled trial.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Saleem et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: