Display Settings:

Format

Send to:

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2012 Apr;5(2):193-201. doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.111.965111. Epub 2012 Mar 27.

Impact of frequency-domain optical coherence tomography guidance for optimal coronary stent implantation in comparison with intravascular ultrasound guidance.

Author information

  • 1Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Toyohashi Heart Center, Toyohashi, Japan.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Frequency-domain optical coherence tomography (FD-OCT) is a novel, high resolution intravascular imaging modality. Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) is a widely used conventional imaging modality for achieving optimal stent deployment. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of FD-OCT guidance for coronary stent implantation compared with IVUS guidance.

METHODS AND RESULTS:

A total of 70 patients with de novo coronary artery lesions and either unstable or stable angina pectoris were enrolled in this randomized study (optical coherence tomography [OCT] group: n=35, IVUS group: n=35). In the OCT group, stent implantation was performed under FD-OCT guidance alone and final stent expansion was evaluated by IVUS. In the IVUS group, conventional IVUS guidance was used and final stent apposition was evaluated by FD-OCT. There were no significant differences regarding the procedural, fluoroscopy time, and contrast volume. Although device and clinical success rates also were similar, the visibility of vessel border was significantly lower in the OCT group (P<0.05). Minimum and mean stent area and focal and diffuse stent expansion were smaller (6.1±2.2 mm versus 7.1±2.1 mm, 7.5±2.5 versus 8.7±2.4 mm, 64.7±13.7% versus 80.3±13.4%, 84.2±15.8% versus 98.8±16.5%, P<0.05, respectively), and the frequency of significant residual reference segment stenosis at the proximal edge was higher in the OCT group (P<0.05). Incomplete apposed struts in both groups were similar (P=0.34).

CONCLUSIONS:

FD-OCT guidance for stent implantation was associated with smaller stent expansion and more frequent significant residual reference segment stenosis compared with conventional IVUS guidance.

Comment in

PMID:
22456026
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Free full text
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Icon for HighWire
    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk