BACKGROUND Optical coherence tomography (OCT) offers detailed cross-sectional imaging during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), aiding in anatomically complex coronary lesions. Despite its advantages, evidence on the clinical effectiveness of OCT-guided PCI remains limited. AIM To compare clinical outcomes of OCT-guided vs angiography-guided PCI in patients with complex lesions. METHODS Major databases were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing OCT-guided and angiography-guided PCI in complex lesions. Primary outcomes included major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and target vessel failure (TVF); secondary outcomes included mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), and other procedural outcomes. A random-effects model was used to pool risk ratio (RR), with 95%CI. Statistical analysis was conducted in R software (v4.4.1), with significance set at P < 0.05. RESULTS Five RCTs (5737 patients) showed OCT-guided PCI significantly reduced MACE (RR: 0.63, 95%CI: 0.52-0.77, P < 0.01), TVF (RR: 0.68, 95%CI: 0.56-0.83, P < 0.01), all-cause (RR: 0.58, 95%CI: 0.38-0.87, P < 0.01) and cardiac mortality (RR: 0.43, 95%CI: 0.24-0.76, P < 0.01), target-lesion revascularization (RR: 0.53, 95%CI: 0.33-0.84, P < 0.01), stent thrombosis (RR: 0.52, 95%CI: 0.31-0.86, P = 0.01), and target-vessel MI (RR: 0.64, 95%CI: 0.42-0.97, P = 0.04) vs angiography-guided PCI. Periprocedural MI, any revascularization, target-vessel revascularization, and contrast-associated kidney injury were similar between groups. CONCLUSION OCT-guided PCI improves outcomes in complex lesions by reducing MACE, TVF, mortality, stent thrombosis, and target-vessel MI. These findings highlight the need for further large-scale RCTs to confirm its benefits.
Burhan et al. (2025) studied this question.