Meta-Analysis of Randomized Studies Comparing Intravascular Ultrasound Versus Angiographic Guidance of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Pre–Drug-Eluting Stent Era

We conducted a formal meta-analysis of peer-reviewed, published, randomized studies comparing intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)-guidance and angiographic-guided bare metal stent implantation. A total of 8 studies were identified. Because the Balloon Equivalent to Stent (BEST) study was a noninferiorit...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The American journal of cardiology 2011-02, Vol.107 (3), p.374-382
Hauptverfasser: Parise, Helen, ScD, Maehara, Akiko, MD, Stone, Gregg W., MD, Leon, Martin B., MD, Mintz, Gary S., MD
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:We conducted a formal meta-analysis of peer-reviewed, published, randomized studies comparing intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)-guidance and angiographic-guided bare metal stent implantation. A total of 8 studies were identified. Because the Balloon Equivalent to Stent (BEST) study was a noninferiority trial designed to compare 2 very different percutaneous coronary intervention strategies—IVUS-guided aggressive balloon angioplasty (with bail-out stenting) and angiographic-guided deliberate bare metal stent implantation—it was eliminated. An unadjusted random-effects meta-analysis was used to compare the IVUS-guided and non–IVUS-guided stenting in the 7 remaining studies. A total of 2,193 patients were randomized in 5 multicenter and 2 single-center studies. IVUS guidance was associated with a significantly larger postprocedure angiographic minimum lumen diameter. The mean difference was 0.12 mm (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.06 to 0.18, p
ISSN:0002-9149
1879-1913
DOI:10.1016/j.amjcard.2010.09.030