Nathaniel R Smilowitz1, Divyanshu Mohananey2, Louai Razzouk1, Giora Weisz3, James N Slater1. 1. Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, NYU School of Medicine, NYU Langone Health, New York, New York. 2. Division of Hospital Medicine, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio. 3. Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Albert Einstein School of Medicine, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, New York.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Intravascular imaging with intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) is an important adjunct to invasive coronary angiography. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to examine the frequency of intravascular coronary imaging, trends in imaging use, and outcomes of patients undergoing angiography and/or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the United States. METHODS: Adult patients ≥18 years of age undergoing in-hospital cardiac catheterization from January 2004 to December 2014 were identified from the National Inpatient Sample (NIS). International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) diagnosis and procedure codes were used to identify IVUS and OCT use during diagnostic angiography and PCI. RESULTS: Among 3,211,872 hospitalizations with coronary angiography, intracoronary imaging was performed in 88,775 cases (4.8% of PCI and 1.0% of diagnostic procedures), with IVUS in 98.9% and OCT in 1.1% of cases. Among patients undergoing PCI, the rate of intravascular coronary imaging increased from 2.1% in 2004-2005 to 6.6% in 2013-2014 (P < 0.001 for trend). Use of intravascular coronary imaging was associated with lower in-hospital mortality in patients undergoing PCI (adjusted OR 0.77; 95% CI 0.71-0.83). There was marked variability in intravascular imaging by hospital, with 63% and 13% of facilities using intravascular imaging in <5% and >15% of PCIs, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In a large administrative database from the United States, intravascular imaging use was low, increased over time, and imaging was associated with reduced in-hospital mortality. Substantial variation in the frequency of intravascular imaging by hospital was observed. Additional investigation to determine clinical benefits of IVUS and OCT are warranted.
BACKGROUND: Intravascular imaging with intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) is an important adjunct to invasive coronary angiography. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to examine the frequency of intravascular coronary imaging, trends in imaging use, and outcomes of patients undergoing angiography and/or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the United States. METHODS: Adult patients ≥18 years of age undergoing in-hospital cardiac catheterization from January 2004 to December 2014 were identified from the National Inpatient Sample (NIS). International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) diagnosis and procedure codes were used to identify IVUS and OCT use during diagnostic angiography and PCI. RESULTS: Among 3,211,872 hospitalizations with coronary angiography, intracoronary imaging was performed in 88,775 cases (4.8% of PCI and 1.0% of diagnostic procedures), with IVUS in 98.9% and OCT in 1.1% of cases. Among patients undergoing PCI, the rate of intravascular coronary imaging increased from 2.1% in 2004-2005 to 6.6% in 2013-2014 (P < 0.001 for trend). Use of intravascular coronary imaging was associated with lower in-hospital mortality in patients undergoing PCI (adjusted OR 0.77; 95% CI 0.71-0.83). There was marked variability in intravascular imaging by hospital, with 63% and 13% of facilities using intravascular imaging in <5% and >15% of PCIs, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In a large administrative database from the United States, intravascular imaging use was low, increased over time, and imaging was associated with reduced in-hospital mortality. Substantial variation in the frequency of intravascular imaging by hospital was observed. Additional investigation to determine clinical benefits of IVUS and OCT are warranted.
Authors: G S Mintz; S E Nissen; W D Anderson; S R Bailey; R Erbel; P J Fitzgerald; F J Pinto; K Rosenfield; R J Siegel; E M Tuzcu; P G Yock Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2001-04 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: P J Scanlon; D P Faxon; A M Audet; B Carabello; G J Dehmer; K A Eagle; R D Legako; D F Leon; J A Murray; S E Nissen; C J Pepine; R M Watson; J L Ritchie; R J Gibbons; M D Cheitlin; T J Gardner; A Garson; R O Russell; T J Ryan; S C Smith Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 1999-05 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Thomas M Maddox; Maggie A Stanislawski; Gary K Grunwald; Steven M Bradley; P Michael Ho; Thomas T Tsai; Manesh R Patel; Amneet Sandhu; Javier Valle; David J Magid; Benjamin Leon; Deepak L Bhatt; Stephan D Fihn; John S Rumsfeld Journal: JAMA Date: 2014-11-05 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Philip B Dattilo; Anand Prasad; Emily Honeycutt; Tracy Y Wang; John C Messenger Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2012-12-04 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Georg M Fröhlich; Simon Redwood; Roby Rakhit; Philip A MacCarthy; Pitt Lim; Tom Crake; Steven K White; Charles J Knight; Christoph Kustosz; Guido Knapp; Miles C Dalby; Iqbal S Mali; Andrew Archbold; Andrew Wragg; Adam D Timmis; Pascal Meier Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2014-08 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: William Wijns; Junya Shite; Michael R Jones; Stephen W L Lee; Matthew J Price; Franco Fabbiocchi; Emanuele Barbato; Takashi Akasaka; Hiram Bezerra; David Holmes Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2015-08-04 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Sarah E Deery; Earl Goldsborough; Chen Dun; Christopher J Abularrage; James H Black; Martin A Makary; Caitlin W Hicks Journal: Ann Vasc Surg Date: 2021-11-12 Impact factor: 1.466