Randomized comparison of coronary stent implantation under ultrasound or angiographic guidance to reduce stent restenosis (OPTICUS Study).

BACKGROUND: Observational studies in selected patients have shown remarkably low restenosis rates after ultrasound-guided stent implantation. However, it is unknown whether this implantation strategy improves long-term angiographic and clinical outcome in routine clinical practice. Methods and Results-- A total of 550 patients with a symptomatic coronary lesion or silent ischemia were randomly assigned to either ultrasound-guided or angiography-guided implantation of </=2 tubular stents. The primary end points were angiographic dichotomous restenosis rate, minimal lumen diameter, and percent diameter stenosis after 6 months as determined by quantitative coronary angiography. Secondary end points were the occurrence rates of major adverse cardiac events (death, myocardial infarction, coronary bypass surgery, and repeat percutaneous intervention) after 6 and 12 months of follow-up. At 6 months, repeat angiography revealed no significant differences between the groups with ultrasound- or angiography-guided stent implantation with respect to dichotomous restenosis rate (24.5% versus 22.8%, P=0.68), minimal lumen diameter (1.95+/-0.72 mm versus 1.91+/-0.68 mm, P=0.52), and percent diameter stenosis (34.8+/-20.6% versus 36.8+/-19.6%, P=0.29), respectively. At 12 months, neither major adverse cardiac events (relative risk, 1.07; 95% CI 0.75 to 1.52; P=0.71) nor repeat percutaneous interventions (relative risk 1.04; 95% CI 0.64 to 1.67; P=0.87) were reduced in the ultrasound-guided group.
CONCLUSIONS: This study does not support the routine use of ultrasound guidance for coronary stenting. Angiography-guided optimization of tubular stents can be performed with comparable angiographic and clinical long-term results.

RCT Entities:   Population Interventions Outcomes