Background: Data regarding clinical outcomes after optical coherence tomography (OCT)-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) as compared with angiography-guided PCI are limited.
Methods: In this prospective, randomized, single-blind trial, we randomly assigned patients with medication-treated diabetes or complex coronary-artery lesions to undergo OCT-guided PCI or angiography-guided PCI. A final blinded OCT procedure was performed in patients in the angiography group. The two primary efficacy end points were the minimum stent area after PCI as assessed with OCT and target-vessel failure at 2 years, defined as a composite of death from cardiac causes, target-vessel myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven target-vessel revascularization. Safety was also assessed.
Results: The trial was conducted at 80 sites in 18 countries. A total of 2487 patients underwent randomization: 1233 patients were assigned to undergo OCT-guided PCI, and 1254 to undergo angiography-guided PCI. The minimum stent area after PCI was 5.72±2.04 mm in the OCT group and 5.36±1.87 mm in the angiography group (mean difference, 0.36 mm; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.21 to 0.51; P<0.001). Target-vessel failure within 2 years occurred in 88 patients in the OCT group and in 99 patients in the angiography group (Kaplan-Meier estimates, 7.4% and 8.2%, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.67 to 1.19; P = 0.45). OCT-related adverse events occurred in 1 patient in the OCT group and in 2 patients in the angiography group. Stent thrombosis within 2 years occurred in 6 patients (0.5%) in the OCT group and in 17 patients (1.4%) in the angiography group.
Conclusions: Among patients undergoing PCI, OCT guidance resulted in a larger minimum stent area than angiography guidance, but there was no apparent between-group difference in the percentage of patients with target-vessel failure at 2 years. (Funded by Abbott; ILUMIEN IV: OPTIMAL PCI ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03507777.).
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
|---|---|
| http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2305861 | DOI Listing |
Publication Analysis
Top Keywords
Similar Publications
Comparison of different guidance strategies to percutaneous coronary intervention: A network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.
Int J Cardiol
December 2024
Cardiothoracic and Vascular Department (DICATOV), IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genova, Italy.
Article Synopsis
- The study evaluates various techniques for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) to determine which yields the best patient outcomes.
- It analyzes data from 39 randomized trials involving over 29,000 patients, highlighting that intravascular imaging (like OCT and IVUS) and physiology-guided strategies (like FFR) significantly reduce cardiac death compared to traditional coronary angiography (CA).
- Overall, the results suggest that OCT is the most effective guidance method, leading to lower rates of myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, and all-cause mortality compared to CA.
Outcomes of Optical Coherence Tomography-Guided and Angiography-Guided Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients with ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction.
Rev Cardiovasc Med
December 2024
Department of Cardiology, Fuwai Hospital, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Peking Union Medical College & Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, 100037 Beijing, China.
Background: Despite the administration of timely reperfusion treatment, patients with acute myocardial infarction have a high mortality rate and poor prognosis. The potential impact of intraluminal imaging guidance, such as optical coherence tomography (OCT), on improving patient outcomes has yet to be conclusively studied. Therefore, we conducted a retrospective cohort study to compare OCT-guided primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus angiography-guided for patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).
View Article and Find Full Text PDFIntravascular Imaging-Guided Versus Angiography-Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction in the United States.
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv
December 2024
Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory of the Cardiovascular Institute, Mount Sinai Hospital, New York, New York, USA.
Background: The role of Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) is still unclear in patients with STEMI undergoing PCI in the current second-generation DES era.
Aims: This study aimed to evaluate the trends and outcomes of IVUS-guided PCI in patients with STEMI.
Methods: We used the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database from 2016 to 2021.
Impact of Bifurcation Lesions on Outcomes After FFR-Guided PCI or CABG.
Circ Cardiovasc Interv
December 2024
Department of Cardiology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands (D.M.M.D., K. Teeuwen, P.A.L.T., N.H.J.P., F.M.Z.).
Background: In the era of first-generation drug-eluting stents and angiography-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), the presence of a bifurcation lesion was associated with adverse outcomes after PCI. In contrast, the presence of a bifurcation lesion had no impact on outcomes following coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Therefore, the presence of a coronary bifurcation lesion requires special attention when choosing between CABG and PCI.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFClinical Relevance of Discordance Between Physiology- and Imaging-Guided PCI Strategies in Intermediate Coronary Stenosis.
JACC Cardiovasc Interv
October 2024
Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea. Electronic address:
Article Synopsis
- Recent studies highlight the advantages of using intravascular imaging (IVI) for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) compared to traditional angiography, but the relevance of angiography-based physiological assessments during this procedure is not fully understood.
- The FLAVOUR trial analyzed the impact of angiography-based physiological evaluations, specifically the quantitative flow ratio (μQFR), on treatment decisions for patients undergoing IVI-guided PCI.
- Results indicated significant reclassification of treatment approaches based on μQFR, with the REFERENCE group experiencing a higher risk of major adverse cardiovascular events, while DEFER and PERFORM groups showed similar outcomes and quality of life after 2 years.*
Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!