OBJECTIVES: Preliminary Investigation to the Angiographic Versus IVUS Optimization Trial is a single center prospective observational intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guided stent implantation study assessing new criteria for optimal drug eluting stent (DES) deployment. BACKGROUND: IVUS assessment of DES often reveals underexpansion and malapposition. Optimal stent deployment is currently poorly defined and previous criteria may not be suitable in long and complex lesions. METHODS: Optimization was defined as achieving >/or 70% of the cross-sectional area (CSA) of the postdilation balloon. This criterion was applied in 113 complex lesions. The size of this balloon was calculated according to vessel media-to-media diameters at various sites inside the stented segment. The IVUS guided treated lesions were matched according to diabetes, vessel type, reference vessel diameter, minimum lumen diameter (MLD), and lesion length with a group of angiographic treated lesions to compare final MLD achieved. RESULTS: Mean minimum stent CSA according to the postdilation balloon utilized was 4.62 mm(2), 6.26 mm(2), 7.87 mm(2), and 9.87 mm(2) for 2.5 mm, 3.0 mm, 3.5 mm, and 4 mm balloons, respectively. Final MLD (mm) was significantly larger in the IVUS compared to the angiographic-guided group (3.09 +/- 0.50 vs. 2.67 +/- 0.54; P < 0.0001). There were no procedural complications related to IVUS use. CONCLUSIONS: We propose new IVUS criteria based on vessel remodeling that results in an increment in the final MLD, compared to angiographic guidance, which is much larger than any previously published study. This criterion seems to be safely achievable. A proposed randomized study (angiographic vs. IVUS optimization trial) has been launched to test these concepts. (c) 2008 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
OBJECTIVES: Preliminary Investigation to the Angiographic Versus IVUS Optimization Trial is a single center prospective observational intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guided stent implantation study assessing new criteria for optimal drug eluting stent (DES) deployment. BACKGROUND: IVUS assessment of DES often reveals underexpansion and malapposition. Optimal stent deployment is currently poorly defined and previous criteria may not be suitable in long and complex lesions. METHODS: Optimization was defined as achieving >/or 70% of the cross-sectional area (CSA) of the postdilation balloon. This criterion was applied in 113 complex lesions. The size of this balloon was calculated according to vessel media-to-media diameters at various sites inside the stented segment. The IVUS guided treated lesions were matched according to diabetes, vessel type, reference vessel diameter, minimum lumen diameter (MLD), and lesion length with a group of angiographic treated lesions to compare final MLD achieved. RESULTS: Mean minimum stent CSA according to the postdilation balloon utilized was 4.62 mm(2), 6.26 mm(2), 7.87 mm(2), and 9.87 mm(2) for 2.5 mm, 3.0 mm, 3.5 mm, and 4 mm balloons, respectively. Final MLD (mm) was significantly larger in the IVUS compared to the angiographic-guided group (3.09 +/- 0.50 vs. 2.67 +/- 0.54; P < 0.0001). There were no procedural complications related to IVUS use. CONCLUSIONS: We propose new IVUS criteria based on vessel remodeling that results in an increment in the final MLD, compared to angiographic guidance, which is much larger than any previously published study. This criterion seems to be safely achievable. A proposed randomized study (angiographic vs. IVUS optimization trial) has been launched to test these concepts. (c) 2008 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
Authors: Nicola Ryan; Nieves Gonzalo; Philip Dingli; Oscar Vedia Cruz; Pilar Jiménez-Quevedo; Luis Nombela-Franco; Ivan Nuñez-Gil; María Del Trigo; Pablo Salinas; Carlos Macaya; Antonio Fernandez-Ortiz; Javier Escaned Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2017-02-14 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Juan Luis Gutiérrez-Chico; Eduardo Alegría-Barrero; Rodrigo Teijeiro-Mestre; Pak Hei Chan; Hiroto Tsujioka; Ranil de Silva; Nicola Viceconte; Alistair Lindsay; Tiffany Patterson; Nicolas Foin; Takashi Akasaka; Carlo di Mario Journal: Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2012-02-13 Impact factor: 6.875
Authors: Jarosław Skowroński; Rafał Wolny; Jan Jastrzębski; Paweł Tyczyński; Karol Szlazak; Jerzy Pręgowski; Gary S Mintz; Karolina Liżewska; Wojciech Świeszkowski; Zbigniew Chmielak; Adam Witkowski Journal: J Interv Cardiol Date: 2019-03-21 Impact factor: 2.279