• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

血管内超声引导下机器人经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的安全性和可行性。

Safety and feasibility of intravascular ultrasound-guided robotic percutaneous coronary intervention.

机构信息

Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Iwate Medical University, Iwate, Japan.

出版信息

Coron Artery Dis. 2023 Nov 1;34(7):463-469. doi: 10.1097/MCA.0000000000001274. Epub 2023 Aug 16.

DOI:10.1097/MCA.0000000000001274
PMID:37799042
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Previous studies have demonstrated the benefit of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for preventing longitudinal geographic miss (LGM). However, it is yet unclear whether IVUS guidance is useful for robotic-PCI (robotic-assisted perctaneous coronary intervention [R-PCI]).

METHODS

A total of 58 consecutive patients with stable angina who underwent IVUS-guided R-PCI were enrolled. The stent landing position was angiographically marked using a balloon marker before stenting, followed by measurements of the expected stent length using balloon pullback. Subsequently, prestenting IVUS was performed to determine stent landing. All pre-PCI IVUS images were assessed for lesion length and percent plaque volume (%PV) using both IVUS and angiographic marking. LGM was defined as a residual %PV >50% at either the distal or proximal stent edge, any stent edge dissection, or additional stent deployment immediately after stenting.

RESULTS

The included patients had an average age of 67.1 ± 10.1 years. IVUS guidance had significantly longer lesion lengths compared with angiographic marking. Based on IVUS-guided stent deployment, nine cases exhibited LGM immediately after stenting. IVUS-marked landing points had a significantly smaller %PV and significantly larger lumen area compared with those for angiography.

CONCLUSION

IVUS-guided R-PCI was well-tolerated and may be better at preventing LGM compared with angiography-guided R-PCI.

摘要

目的

先前的研究已经证明血管内超声(IVUS)引导经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)在预防纵向地理性缺失(LGM)方面的益处。然而,IVUS 引导是否对机器人 PCI(机器人辅助经皮冠状动脉介入治疗[R-PCI])有用仍不清楚。

方法

共纳入 58 例稳定型心绞痛患者,均接受 IVUS 引导的 R-PCI。在支架置入前,使用球囊标记物对支架的血管内超声(IVUS)定位,然后使用球囊回缩测量预期支架长度。随后,进行支架置入前 IVUS 检查以确定支架的位置。使用 IVUS 和血管造影标记评估所有 PCI 前 IVUS 图像的病变长度和斑块体积百分比(%PV)。LGM 定义为支架边缘远端或近端残留的 %PV>50%、任何支架边缘夹层或支架置入后立即进行额外的支架置入。

结果

纳入的患者平均年龄为 67.1±10.1 岁。与血管造影标记相比,IVUS 引导的病变长度明显更长。根据 IVUS 引导的支架置入,9 例患者在支架置入后即刻出现 LGM。与血管造影相比,IVUS 标记的支架置入点具有更小的%PV 和更大的管腔面积。

结论

与血管造影引导的 R-PCI 相比,IVUS 引导的 R-PCI 耐受性良好,并且可能更能预防 LGM。

相似文献

1
Safety and feasibility of intravascular ultrasound-guided robotic percutaneous coronary intervention.血管内超声引导下机器人经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的安全性和可行性。
Coron Artery Dis. 2023 Nov 1;34(7):463-469. doi: 10.1097/MCA.0000000000001274. Epub 2023 Aug 16.
2
Intravascular ultrasound-guided percutaneous coronary intervention for patients with unprotected left main coronary artery lesions.血管内超声引导下经皮冠状动脉介入治疗无保护左主干病变。
Coron Artery Dis. 2024 May 1;35(3):171-178. doi: 10.1097/MCA.0000000000001356. Epub 2024 Mar 8.
3
Optical frequency domain imaging-guided versus intravascular ultrasound-guided percutaneous coronary intervention for acute coronary syndromes: the OPINION ACS randomised trial.光学相干断层成像引导与血管内超声引导的急性冠状动脉综合征经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的比较:OPINION ACS 随机试验。
EuroIntervention. 2024 Sep 2;20(17):e1086-e1097. doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-24-00314.
4
Clinical Outcomes Following Intravascular Imaging-Guided Versus Coronary Angiography-Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Stent Implantation: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis of 31 Studies and 17,882 Patients.血管内影像引导与冠状动脉造影引导经皮冠状动脉介入治疗伴支架植入的临床结局:31 项研究和 17882 例患者的系统评价和贝叶斯网络荟萃分析。
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2017 Dec 26;10(24):2488-2498. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2017.08.051. Epub 2017 Nov 15.
5
Comparison of Long-Term Outcomes Between Intravascular Ultrasound-, Optical Coherence Tomography- and Angiography-Guided Stent Implantation: A Meta-Analysis.血管内超声、光学相干断层成像和血管造影指导下支架置入的长期疗效比较:Meta 分析。
Angiology. 2024 Oct;75(9):809-819. doi: 10.1177/00033197231198674. Epub 2023 Aug 30.
6
Coronary Angiography, Intravascular Ultrasound, and Optical Coherence Tomography for Guiding of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.冠状动脉造影、血管内超声和光学相干断层成像指导经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的系统评价和网络荟萃分析。
Circulation. 2024 Apr 2;149(14):1065-1086. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.123.067583. Epub 2024 Feb 12.
7
Intravascular imaging-guided versus angiography-guided percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.血管内成像指导与血管造影指导的经皮冠状动脉介入治疗:随机对照试验的系统评价和贝叶斯网状荟萃分析。
BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2024 Sep 11;24(1):483. doi: 10.1186/s12872-024-04105-5.
8
Intravascular ultrasound-guided versus coronary angiography-guided percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute myocardial infarction: A systematic review and meta-analysis.急性心肌梗死患者血管内超声引导与冠状动脉造影引导下经皮冠状动脉介入治疗:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。
Int J Cardiol. 2022 Apr 15;353:35-42. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2022.01.021. Epub 2022 Jan 15.
9
Intravascular ultrasound-guided interventions in coronary artery disease: a systematic literature review, with decision-analytic modelling, of outcomes and cost-effectiveness.冠状动脉疾病中血管内超声引导干预:一项系统文献综述,结合决策分析模型,关于结局和成本效益。
Health Technol Assess. 2000;4(35):1-117.
10
The Racial Differences in the Clinical Outcomes of Intravascular Ultrasound-Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.血管内超声指导下经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的临床结局中的种族差异:系统评价和荟萃分析。
Am J Cardiol. 2023 Sep 15;203:193-202. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2023.06.084. Epub 2023 Jul 25.

引用本文的文献

1
Features and Limitations of Robotically Assisted Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (R-PCI): A Systematic Review of R-PCI.机器人辅助经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(R-PCI)的特点与局限性:R-PCI的系统评价
J Clin Med. 2024 Sep 19;13(18):5537. doi: 10.3390/jcm13185537.