Kwon Woochan, Hong David, Choi Ki Hong, Lee Seung Hun, Shin Doosup, Lee Jong-Young, Lee Seung-Jae, Lee Sang Yeub, Kim Sang Min, Yun Kyeong Ho, Cho Jae Young, Kim Chan Joon, Ahn Hyo-Suk, Nam Chang-Wook, Yoon Hyuck-Jun, Park Yong Hwan, Lee Wang Soo, Park Taek Kyu, Yang Jeong Hoon, Choi Seung-Hyuk, Gwon Hyeon-Cheol, Song Young Bin, Hahn Joo-Yong, Lee Joo Myung
Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Department of Internal Medicine and Cardiovascular Center, Chonnam National University Hospital, Gwangju, Korea.
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2024 Jan 22;17(2):292-303. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2023.10.062.
Although benefits of intravascular imaging (IVI) in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) have been observed in previous studies, it is not known whether changes in contemporary practice, especially with application of standardized optimization protocols, have improved clinical outcomes.
The authors sought to investigate whether clinical outcomes of IVI-guided PCI are different before and after the application of standardized optimization protocols in using IVI.
2,972 patients from an institutional registry (2008-2015, before application of standardized optimization protocols, the past group) and 1,639 patients from a recently published trial (2018-2021 after application of standardized optimization protocols, the present group) were divided into 2 groups according to use of IVI. The primary outcome was 3-year target vessel failure (TVF), a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization.
Significant reduction of TVF was observed in the IVI-guided PCI group compared with the angiography-guided PCI group (10.0% vs 6.7%; HR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.61-0.97; P = 0.027), mainly driven by reduced cardiac death or myocardial infarction in both past and present IVI-guided PCI groups. When comparing past IVI and present IVI groups, TVF was significantly lower in the present IVI group (8.5% vs 5.1%; HR: 0.63; 95% CI: 0.42-0.94; P = 0.025), with the difference being driven by reduced target vessel revascularization in the present IVI group. Consistent results were observed in inverse-probability-weighting adjusted analysis.
IVI-guided PCI improved clinical outcomes more than angiography-guided PCI. In addition, application of standardized optimization protocols when using IVI further improved clinical outcomes after PCI. (Intravascular Imaging- Versus Angiography-Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention For Complex Coronary Artery Disease [RENOVATE-COMPLEX-PCI]; NCT03381872; and the institutional cardiovascular catheterization database of Samsung Medical Center: Long-Term Outcomes and Prognostic Factors in Patient Undergoing CABG or PCI; NCT03870815).
尽管先前的研究已观察到血管内成像(IVI)在经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)中的益处,但尚不清楚当代实践中的变化,尤其是标准化优化方案的应用是否改善了临床结局。
作者试图研究在使用IVI时应用标准化优化方案前后,IVI引导的PCI的临床结局是否有所不同。
将来自机构注册研究的2972例患者(2008 - 2015年,在应用标准化优化方案之前,既往组)和来自最近发表试验的1639例患者(2018 - 2021年,在应用标准化优化方案之后,当前组)根据是否使用IVI分为两组。主要结局是3年靶血管失败(TVF),这是一个包括心源性死亡、靶血管心肌梗死或靶血管血运重建的复合终点。
与血管造影引导的PCI组相比,IVI引导的PCI组的TVF显著降低(10.0%对6.7%;HR:0.77;95%CI:0.61 - 0.97;P = 0.027),主要是由于既往和当前IVI引导的PCI组中心源性死亡或心肌梗死的减少。在比较既往IVI组和当前IVI组时,当前IVI组的TVF显著更低(8.5%对5.1%;HR:0.63;95%CI:0.42 - 0.94;P = 0.025),差异是由当前IVI组中靶血管血运重建的减少所驱动。在逆概率加权调整分析中观察到了一致的结果。
IVI引导的PCI比血管造影引导的PCI更能改善临床结局。此外,在使用IVI时应用标准化优化方案进一步改善了PCI后的临床结局。(血管内成像与血管造影引导的复杂冠状动脉疾病经皮冠状动脉介入治疗[RENOVATE - COMPLEX - PCI];NCT03381872;以及三星医疗中心的机构心血管导管插入数据库:接受冠状动脉搭桥术或PCI患者的长期结局和预后因素;NCT03870815)