Erasmus Medical Centre, Thoraxcenter, Ba583a, 's-Gravendijkwal 230, 3015 CE Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012 Mar;28(3):467-78. doi: 10.1007/s10554-011-9829-y. Epub 2011 Feb 26.
The bioresorbable vascular stent (BVS) is totally translucent and radiolucent, leading to challenges when using conventional invasive imaging modalities. Agreement between quantitative coronary angiography (QCA), intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) in the BVS is unknown. Forty five patients enrolled in the ABSORB cohort B1 study underwent coronary angiography, IVUS and OCT immediately post BVS implantation, and at 6 months. OCT estimated stent length accurately compared to nominal length (95% CI of the difference: -0.19; 0.37 and -0.15; 0.47 mm(2) for baseline and 6 months, respectively), whereas QCA incurred consistent underestimation of the same magnitude at both time points (Pearson correlation = 0.806). IVUS yielded low accuracy (95% CI of the difference: 0.77; 3.74 and -1.15; 3.27 mm(2) for baseline and 6 months, respectively), with several outliers and random variability test-retest. Minimal lumen area (MLA) decreased substantially between baseline and 6 months on QCA and OCT and only minimally on IVUS (95% CI: 0.11; 0.42). Agreement between the different imaging modalities is poor: worst agreement Videodensitometry-IVUS post-implantation (ICCa 0.289); best agreement IVUS-OCT at baseline (ICCa 0.767). All pairs deviated significantly from linearity (P < 0.01). Passing-Bablok non-parametric orthogonal regression showed constant and proportional bias between IVUS and OCT. OCT is the most accurate technique for measuring stent length, whilst QCA incurs systematic underestimation (foreshortening) and solid state IVUS incurs random error. Volumetric calculations using solid state IVUS are therefore not reliable. There is poor agreement for MLA estimation between all the imaging modalities studied, including IVUS-OCT, hence their values are not interchangeable.
生物可吸收血管支架(BVS)完全透明且不透射线,这导致在使用传统的侵入性成像方式时存在挑战。定量冠状动脉造影(QCA)、血管内超声(IVUS)和光学相干断层扫描(OCT)在 BVS 中的一致性尚不清楚。ABSORB 队列 B1 研究共纳入 45 例患者,这些患者在植入 BVS 后即刻、6 个月时分别接受冠状动脉造影、IVUS 和 OCT 检查。OCT 测量的支架长度与标称长度准确匹配(差值的 95%CI:植入后即刻为-0.19;0.37 和-0.15;0.47mm(2);6 个月时为-0.19;0.37 和-0.15;0.47mm(2)),而 QCA 在两个时间点均一致低估了相同的数值(Pearson 相关性=0.806)。IVUS 的准确性较低(差值的 95%CI:植入后即刻为 0.77;3.74 和-1.15;3.27mm(2);6 个月时为 0.77;3.74 和-1.15;3.27mm(2)),有几个离群值和随机变异性测试-再测试。QCA 和 OCT 上的最小管腔面积(MLA)在基线和 6 个月时明显减少,而 IVUS 上仅略有减少(95%CI:0.11;0.42)。不同成像方式之间的一致性较差:植入后即刻的 Videodensitometry-IVUS 一致性最差(ICCa 0.289);基线时的 IVUS-OCT 一致性最好(ICCa 0.767)。所有配对均显著偏离线性(P<0.01)。非参数正交回归显示 IVUS 和 OCT 之间存在恒定且成比例的偏差。OCT 是测量支架长度最准确的技术,而 QCA 会系统地低估(缩短),固态 IVUS 会产生随机误差。因此,使用固态 IVUS 进行体积计算不可靠。在所研究的所有成像方式中,包括 IVUS-OCT,对 MLA 的估计一致性都较差,因此它们的值不能互换。