Cited 9 times in
Is Routine Postdilation During Angiography-Guided Stent Implantation as Good as Intravascular Ultrasound Guidance?: An Analysis Using Data From IVUS-XPL and ULTIMATE
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | 고영국 | - |
dc.contributor.author | 김병극 | - |
dc.contributor.author | 김중선 | - |
dc.contributor.author | 안철민 | - |
dc.contributor.author | 이용준 | - |
dc.contributor.author | 장양수 | - |
dc.contributor.author | 최동훈 | - |
dc.contributor.author | 홍명기 | - |
dc.contributor.author | 홍성진 | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2022-03-11T05:56:30Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2022-03-11T05:56:30Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2022-01 | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 1941-7640 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | https://ir.ymlib.yonsei.ac.kr/handle/22282913/187874 | - |
dc.description.abstract | Background: There are 2 competing approaches to optimize drug-eluting stent implantation: angiography-guided routine postdilation or intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guidance. Methods: From the pooled data of 2 randomized trials, IVUS-XPL (Impact of Intravascular Ultrasound Guidance on the Outcomes of Xience Prime Stents in Long Lesions) and ULTIMATE (Intravascular Ultrasound Guided Drug Eluting Stents Implantation in All-Comers Coronary Lesions), that compared IVUS- versus angiography-guided drug-eluting stent implantation, we compared 1037 patients (1265 lesions) with IVUS-guided postdilation, 905 patients (1170 lesions) with angiography-guided postdilation, and 383 patients (397 lesions) with angiography-guided drug-eluting stent implantation without postdilation as a reference group; all patients required ≥28 mm long stents. The primary end point was composite of cardiac death, target lesion-related myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization at 3 years. Results: Postintervention quantitative coronary angiography-based minimum lumen diameter was not different between the angiography guidance with postdilation versus the angiography guidance without postdilation group (2.5±0.4 mm versus 2.5±0.4 mm; P=0.367). However, it was larger in the IVUS guidance with postdilation versus the angiography guidance without postdilation group (2.6±0.5 mm versus 2.5±0.4 mm; P=0.046), and also in the IVUS guidance with postdilation versus the angiography guidance with postdilation group (2.6±0.5 mm versus 2.5±0.4 mm; P<0.001). The rate of the primary end point was not different between the angiography guidance with postdilation versus the angiography guidance without postdilation group (8.6% versus 9.8%; hazard ratio, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.58-1.29]; P=0.473). However, it was lower after IVUS guidance with postdilation versus angiography guidance without postdilation (4.5% versus 9.8%; hazard ratio, 0.44 [95% CI, 0.28-0.68]; P<0.001) and also after IVUS guidance with postdilation versus angiography guidance with postdilation (4.5% versus 8.6%; hazard ratio, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.35-0.74]; P<0.001). Conclusions: In patients undergoing long drug-eluting stent implantation, IVUS-guided postdilation was associated with improved long-term clinical outcomes, unlike angiography-guided postdilation. | - |
dc.description.statementOfResponsibility | restriction | - |
dc.language | English | - |
dc.publisher | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins | - |
dc.relation.isPartOf | CIRCULATION-CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS | - |
dc.rights | CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 KR | - |
dc.title | Is Routine Postdilation During Angiography-Guided Stent Implantation as Good as Intravascular Ultrasound Guidance?: An Analysis Using Data From IVUS-XPL and ULTIMATE | - |
dc.type | Article | - |
dc.contributor.college | College of Medicine (의과대학) | - |
dc.contributor.department | Dept. of Internal Medicine (내과학교실) | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Yong-Joon Lee | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Jun-Jie Zhang | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Gary S Mintz | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Sung-Jin Hong | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Chul-Min Ahn | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Jung-Sun Kim | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Byeong-Keuk Kim | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Young-Guk Ko | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Donghoon Choi | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Yangsoo Jang | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Jing Kan | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Tao Pan | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Xiaofei Gao | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Zhen Ge | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Shao-Liang Chen | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Myeong-Ki Hong | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.121.011366 | - |
dc.contributor.localId | A00127 | - |
dc.contributor.localId | A00493 | - |
dc.contributor.localId | A00961 | - |
dc.contributor.localId | A02269 | - |
dc.contributor.localId | A02984 | - |
dc.contributor.localId | A03448 | - |
dc.contributor.localId | A04053 | - |
dc.contributor.localId | A04391 | - |
dc.contributor.localId | A04403 | - |
dc.relation.journalcode | J00539 | - |
dc.identifier.eissn | 1941-7632 | - |
dc.identifier.pmid | 35041452 | - |
dc.identifier.url | https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.121.011366 | - |
dc.subject.keyword | angiography | - |
dc.subject.keyword | death | - |
dc.subject.keyword | drug-eluting stent | - |
dc.subject.keyword | percutaneous coronary intervention | - |
dc.subject.keyword | thrombosis | - |
dc.contributor.alternativeName | Ko, Young Guk | - |
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor | 고영국 | - |
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor | 김병극 | - |
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor | 김중선 | - |
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor | 안철민 | - |
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor | 이용준 | - |
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor | 장양수 | - |
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor | 최동훈 | - |
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor | 홍명기 | - |
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor | 홍성진 | - |
dc.citation.volume | 15 | - |
dc.citation.number | 1 | - |
dc.citation.startPage | e11366 | - |
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitation | CIRCULATION-CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS, Vol.15(1) : e11366, 2022-01 | - |
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.