MbrlCatalogueTitleDetail

Do you wish to reserve the book?
Optical Coherence Tomography versus Intravascular Ultrasound-Guided Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Multicenter Propensity-Matched Analysis
Optical Coherence Tomography versus Intravascular Ultrasound-Guided Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Multicenter Propensity-Matched Analysis
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
You are currently in the queue to collect this book. You will be notified once it is your turn to collect the book.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Optical Coherence Tomography versus Intravascular Ultrasound-Guided Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Multicenter Propensity-Matched Analysis
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Title added to your shelf!
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Do you wish to request the book?
Optical Coherence Tomography versus Intravascular Ultrasound-Guided Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Multicenter Propensity-Matched Analysis
Optical Coherence Tomography versus Intravascular Ultrasound-Guided Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Multicenter Propensity-Matched Analysis

Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
How would you like to get it?
We have requested the book for you! Sorry the robot delivery is not available at the moment
We have requested the book for you!
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Optical Coherence Tomography versus Intravascular Ultrasound-Guided Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Multicenter Propensity-Matched Analysis
Optical Coherence Tomography versus Intravascular Ultrasound-Guided Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Multicenter Propensity-Matched Analysis
Journal Article

Optical Coherence Tomography versus Intravascular Ultrasound-Guided Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Multicenter Propensity-Matched Analysis

2026
Request Book From Autostore and Choose the Collection Method
Overview
Current guidelines recommend intravascular imaging guidance for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). While both optical coherence tomography (OCT) and intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) are endorsed, comparative data in STEMI remain limited. To compare clinical outcomes between OCT and IVUS guidance for primary PCI for ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). From a multicenter registry of 2,777 consecutive STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI within 24 hours from onset at 12 Japanese hospitals, we analyzed 2,291 patients who received OCT-guided (n = 244, 10.7%) or IVUS-guided (n = 2,047, 89.3%) PCI. The primary endpoint was target vessel-related major adverse cardiac events (TV-MACE): cardiovascular death, target vessel revascularization, and target vessel-related myocardial infarction. Propensity score matching was performed to adjust for baseline differences. During median follow-up of 722 days, TV-MACE rates tended to be lower in the OCT group in unmatched analysis (9.8% vs 14.5%; p = 0.051). After propensity matching (187 pairs), this difference disappeared (8.6% vs 10.2%; p = 0.723). Kaplan–Meier analysis showed no significant differences for TV-MACE (hazard ratio [HR] 0.82, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.42 to 1.59, p = 0.552), cardiovascular death (HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.32, p = 0.150), or target vessel revascularization (HR 1.07, 95% CI 0.43 to 2.63, p = 0.891). OCT guidance was associated with more frequent procedures without stenting (12.8% vs 5.3%, p = 0.027) and fewer stents per patient (0.99 ± 0.52 vs 1.15 ± 0.56, p = 0.006). In conclusion, OCT-guided PCI demonstrated comparable outcomes to IVUS-guided PCI in STEMI patients, supporting the use of either imaging modality for primary PCI. Condensed abstract: This multicenter registry compared optical coherence tomography (OCT) versus intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guidance for primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Clinical outcomes were compared between the patients undergoing OCT-guided PCI (n = 244) and those with IVUS-guided PCI (n = 2,047). After propensity score matching (187 pairs), target vessel-related major adverse cardiac events rates were similar between OCT and IVUS groups (8.6% vs 10.2%, p = 0.723) during median 722-day follow-up. No significant differences were observed in cardiovascular death or target vessel revascularization. OCT guidance was associated with more frequent procedures without stenting and fewer stents per patient. Both imaging modalities demonstrated comparable clinical outcomes.