Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Clinical and Procedural Outcomes of IVUS-Guided vs. Angiography-Guided CTO-PCI: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
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.
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?
Clinical and Procedural Outcomes of IVUS-Guided vs. Angiography-Guided CTO-PCI: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Do you wish to request the book?
Clinical and Procedural Outcomes of IVUS-Guided vs. Angiography-Guided CTO-PCI: A Systematic Review and Meta-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
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.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Clinical and Procedural Outcomes of IVUS-Guided vs. Angiography-Guided CTO-PCI: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
2023
Overview
Chronic total occlusions (CTO) in coronary angiographies present a significant challenge nowadays. Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) is a valuable tool during CTO-PCI, aiding in planning and achieving procedural success. However, the impact of IVUS on clinical and procedural outcomes in CTO-PCI remains uncertain. This meta-analysis aimed to compare IVUS-guided and angiography-guided approaches in CTO-PCI. The study included five studies and 2320 patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) and CTO. The primary outcome of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) did not significantly differ between the groups (p = 0.40). Stent thrombosis was the only secondary clinical outcome that showed a significant difference, favoring the IVUS-guided approach (p = 0.01). Procedural outcomes revealed that IVUS-guided procedures had longer stents, larger diameters, and longer procedure and fluoroscopy times (p = 0.007, p < 0.001, p = 0.03, p = 0.002, respectively). Stent number and contrast volume did not significantly differ between the approaches (p = 0.88 and p = 0.33, respectively). In summary, routine IVUS use did not significantly improve clinical outcomes, except for reducing stent thrombosis. Decisions in CTO-PCI should be individualized based on patient characteristics and supported by a multi-parametric approach.
Publisher
MDPI AG,MDPI
Subject
