Format

Send to

Choose Destination
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2018 Jul 23;11(14):1313-1321. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2018.01.274.

Angiography Alone Versus Angiography Plus Optical Coherence Tomography to Guide Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Outcomes From the Pan-London PCI Cohort.

Author information

1
Department of Cardiology, Barts Heart Centre, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom. Electronic address: dan.jones@bartshealth.nhs.uk.
2
Department of Cardiology, Barts Heart Centre, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom.
3
Department of Cardiology, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, Hammersmith Hospital, London, United Kingdom.
4
Department of Cardiology, St. George's Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, St. George's Hospital, London, United Kingdom.
5
Department of Cardiology, Royal Brompton & Harefield NHS Foundation Trust, Harefield Hospital, Middlesex, United Kingdom.
6
Department of Cardiology, Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.
7
Department of Cardiology, St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, Guy's & St Thomas' Hospital, London, United Kingdom.
8
Department of Cardiology, King's College Hospital, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES:

This study aimed to determine the effect on long-term survival of using optical coherence tomography (OCT) during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

BACKGROUND:

Angiographic guidance for PCI has substantial limitations. The superior spatial resolution of OCT could translate into meaningful clinical benefits, although limited data exist to date about their effect on clinical endpoints.

METHODS:

This was a cohort study based on the Pan-London (United Kingdom) PCI registry, which includes 123,764 patients who underwent PCI in National Health Service hospitals in London between 2005 and 2015. Patients undergoing primary PCI or pressure wire use were excluded leaving 87,166 patients in the study. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality at a median of 4.8 years.

RESULTS:

OCT was used in 1,149 (1.3%) patients, intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) was used in 10,971 (12.6%) patients, and angiography alone in the remaining 75,046 patients. Overall OCT rates increased over time (p < 0.0001), with variation in rates between centers (p = 0.002). The mean stent length was shortest in the angiography-guided group, longer in the IVUS-guided group, and longest in the OCT-guided group. OCT-guided procedures were associated with greater procedural success rates and reduced in-hospital MACE rates. A significant difference in mortality was observed between patients who underwent OCT-guided PCI (7.7%) compared with patients who underwent either IVUS-guided (12.2%) or angiography-guided (15.7%; p < 0.0001) PCI, with differences seen for both elective (p < 0.0001) and acute coronary syndrome subgroups (p = 0.0024). Overall this difference persisted after multivariate Cox analysis (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.26 to 0.81; p = 0.001) and propensity matching (hazard ratio: 0.39; 95% CI: 0.21 to 0.77; p = 0.0008; OCT vs. angiography-alone cohort), with no difference in matched OCT and IVUS cohorts (HR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.61 to 1.38; p = 0.43).

CONCLUSIONS:

In this large observational study, OCT-guided PCI was associated with improved procedural outcomes, in-hospital events, and long-term survival compared with standard angiography-guided PCI.

KEYWORDS:

intravascular ultrasound; optical coherence tomography; percutaneous coronary intervention

PMID:
30025725
DOI:
10.1016/j.jcin.2018.01.274

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center