Why the study?
This study was conducted to investigate temporal trends, indications, practice variation, and outcomes associated with intravascular imaging use in a large, multicenter CTO PCI registry.
Does intravascular imaging (specifically intravascular ultrasound) use during chronic total occlusion percutaneous coronary intervention improve technical and procedural success rates compared with no intravascular imaging?
Cohort (n=18,024)
Yes
Does intravascular imaging (specifically intravascular ultrasound) use during chronic total occlusion percutaneous coronary intervention improve technical and procedural success rates compared with no intravascular imaging?
In a large multicenter registry of over 18,000 CTO PCIs, intravascular ultrasound use to facilitate lesion crossing—particularly for ambiguous proximal caps—was significantly associated with higher technical and procedural success without increasing in-hospital MACE.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Observational registry trends in intravascular imaging for CTO PCI are hypothesis-generating; randomized trials needed before practice change.
Background In this study we investigated temporal trends, indications, practice variation, and outcomes associated with intravascular imaging (IVI) use in a large, multicenter chronic total occlusion (CTO) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) registry. Methods We analyzed CTO PCIs performed at 76 US and international centers in 2012-2026 in the PROGRESS-CTO registry. Patients were categorized according to IVI use. P value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results Among 18,024 CTO PCIs, IVI was used in 10,569 procedures (58.6%). IVI use increased over time. Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) was the predominant modality, accounting for 98.1% of IVI-guided procedures. Following 1:1 propensity score matching, technical (85.8% vs 78.8%; p < 0.001) and procedural success (83.6% vs 78.1%, p = 0.003) remained higher in the IVUS-to-cross group. Difference was also pronounced when IVUS was used to cross ambiguous proximal cap: technical success was 85.1% versus 75.9% (OR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.49-2.21), and procedural success was 83.0% versus 75.1% (OR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.34-1.99). Centers contributing <100 cases had lower IVI use than centers contributing ≥100 cases (47.7% vs 58.7%; p < 0.001). Conclusion IVI use during CTO PCI continues to increase. Procedures in which IVUS was used to facilitate lesion crossing were associated with higher technical and procedural success rates and similar in-hospital MACE rates. The association with success was also pronounced when IVUS was used to resolve proximal cap ambiguity. IVI use varied significantly among participating centers, highlighting differences in practice patterns and adoption of IVI during CTO PCI.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Akyel et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Chronic total occlusion undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (n=18,024). Intravascular imaging (predominantly intravascular ultrasound) guidance during CTO PCI vs. CTO PCI without intravascular imaging / without IVUS-to-cross was evaluated on Technical success (in 1:1 propensity score-matched IVUS-to-cross analysis) (p=<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: