Routine intravascular ultrasound scanning guidance of coronary stenting is not associated with improved clinical outcomes

James L. Orford, Ali E. Denktas, Brent A. Williams, Panayotis Fasseas, James T. Willerson, Peter B. Berger, David Holmes

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

20 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of the current study was to determine whether there is any incremental benefit to routine intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guidance of percutaneous coronary intervention. Methods and results We compared the outcome of 796 patients who underwent an IVUS study (IVUS group) during the index stent procedure with 8274 patients who did not have an IVUS study (angiography group). The primary end point was the composite end point of death, myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization within 9 months of the index stent procedure. There were statistically significant differences in multiple procedural characteristics. Most importantly, those patients who underwent an IVUS study had a larger postprocedural minimal lumen diameter and smaller postprocedural percent diameter stenosis. However, there was no significant difference between the IVUS group and the angiography group with respect to the primary end point (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.91, 1.32) or any of the individual clinical end points. Adjustment for multiple clinical and procedural characteristics did not significantly alter these findings. Conclusions These data suggest that the routine performance of IVUS during stent placement influences the performance of the procedure, as judged by differences in procedural characteristics, but does not improve clinical outcome at 9 months.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)501-506
Number of pages6
JournalAmerican Heart Journal
Volume148
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1 2004

Fingerprint

Stents
Angiography
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
Myocardial Ischemia
Pathologic Constriction
Myocardial Infarction

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

Routine intravascular ultrasound scanning guidance of coronary stenting is not associated with improved clinical outcomes. / Orford, James L.; Denktas, Ali E.; Williams, Brent A.; Fasseas, Panayotis; Willerson, James T.; Berger, Peter B.; Holmes, David.

In: American Heart Journal, Vol. 148, No. 3, 01.09.2004, p. 501-506.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Orford, James L. ; Denktas, Ali E. ; Williams, Brent A. ; Fasseas, Panayotis ; Willerson, James T. ; Berger, Peter B. ; Holmes, David. / Routine intravascular ultrasound scanning guidance of coronary stenting is not associated with improved clinical outcomes. In: American Heart Journal. 2004 ; Vol. 148, No. 3. pp. 501-506.
@article{4f5401a152b748729e1f09f0a8daca6d,
title = "Routine intravascular ultrasound scanning guidance of coronary stenting is not associated with improved clinical outcomes",
abstract = "Purpose The purpose of the current study was to determine whether there is any incremental benefit to routine intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guidance of percutaneous coronary intervention. Methods and results We compared the outcome of 796 patients who underwent an IVUS study (IVUS group) during the index stent procedure with 8274 patients who did not have an IVUS study (angiography group). The primary end point was the composite end point of death, myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization within 9 months of the index stent procedure. There were statistically significant differences in multiple procedural characteristics. Most importantly, those patients who underwent an IVUS study had a larger postprocedural minimal lumen diameter and smaller postprocedural percent diameter stenosis. However, there was no significant difference between the IVUS group and the angiography group with respect to the primary end point (RR 1.10, 95{\%} CI 0.91, 1.32) or any of the individual clinical end points. Adjustment for multiple clinical and procedural characteristics did not significantly alter these findings. Conclusions These data suggest that the routine performance of IVUS during stent placement influences the performance of the procedure, as judged by differences in procedural characteristics, but does not improve clinical outcome at 9 months.",
author = "Orford, {James L.} and Denktas, {Ali E.} and Williams, {Brent A.} and Panayotis Fasseas and Willerson, {James T.} and Berger, {Peter B.} and David Holmes",
year = "2004",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.ahj.2004.03.033",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "148",
pages = "501--506",
journal = "American Heart Journal",
issn = "0002-8703",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Routine intravascular ultrasound scanning guidance of coronary stenting is not associated with improved clinical outcomes

AU - Orford, James L.

AU - Denktas, Ali E.

AU - Williams, Brent A.

AU - Fasseas, Panayotis

AU - Willerson, James T.

AU - Berger, Peter B.

AU - Holmes, David

PY - 2004/9/1

Y1 - 2004/9/1

N2 - Purpose The purpose of the current study was to determine whether there is any incremental benefit to routine intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guidance of percutaneous coronary intervention. Methods and results We compared the outcome of 796 patients who underwent an IVUS study (IVUS group) during the index stent procedure with 8274 patients who did not have an IVUS study (angiography group). The primary end point was the composite end point of death, myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization within 9 months of the index stent procedure. There were statistically significant differences in multiple procedural characteristics. Most importantly, those patients who underwent an IVUS study had a larger postprocedural minimal lumen diameter and smaller postprocedural percent diameter stenosis. However, there was no significant difference between the IVUS group and the angiography group with respect to the primary end point (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.91, 1.32) or any of the individual clinical end points. Adjustment for multiple clinical and procedural characteristics did not significantly alter these findings. Conclusions These data suggest that the routine performance of IVUS during stent placement influences the performance of the procedure, as judged by differences in procedural characteristics, but does not improve clinical outcome at 9 months.

AB - Purpose The purpose of the current study was to determine whether there is any incremental benefit to routine intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guidance of percutaneous coronary intervention. Methods and results We compared the outcome of 796 patients who underwent an IVUS study (IVUS group) during the index stent procedure with 8274 patients who did not have an IVUS study (angiography group). The primary end point was the composite end point of death, myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization within 9 months of the index stent procedure. There were statistically significant differences in multiple procedural characteristics. Most importantly, those patients who underwent an IVUS study had a larger postprocedural minimal lumen diameter and smaller postprocedural percent diameter stenosis. However, there was no significant difference between the IVUS group and the angiography group with respect to the primary end point (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.91, 1.32) or any of the individual clinical end points. Adjustment for multiple clinical and procedural characteristics did not significantly alter these findings. Conclusions These data suggest that the routine performance of IVUS during stent placement influences the performance of the procedure, as judged by differences in procedural characteristics, but does not improve clinical outcome at 9 months.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=4644327580&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=4644327580&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ahj.2004.03.033

DO - 10.1016/j.ahj.2004.03.033

M3 - Article

C2 - 15389239

AN - SCOPUS:4644327580

VL - 148

SP - 501

EP - 506

JO - American Heart Journal

JF - American Heart Journal

SN - 0002-8703

IS - 3

ER -