Abstract
Background Optical coherence tomography (OCT) and intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) are adjunctive intracoronary imaging modalities used for optimizing the implantation of coronary stents. However, the impact of the choice of OCT versus IVUS on clinical outcomes and periprocedural complications is unclear.
Objective To perform a meta-analysis of all vetted randomized controlled trials comparing OCT-guided versus IVUS-guided percutaneous coronary intervention.
Methods We queried MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and clinicalTrials.gov databases from their commencement to February 2024 for all randomized controlled trials that compared OCT-guided versus IVUS-guided percutaneous coronary interventions. The primary endpoint was major adverse periprocedural events (MAPE), a composite of stent thrombosis (ST), distal embolization (DE), and distal edge dissection (DED). The secondary endpoints included stent thrombosis, distal embolization, distal edge dissection, Major-adverse-cardiac events (MACE)-[a composite of cardiac death, Target vessel myocardial infarction (TVMI), and target vessel revascularization (TVR)], all-cause mortality, cardiac death, TVMI, TVR, and nonfatal stroke. The odds ratio (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) was analyzed using a random-effect model.
Results Seven randomized controlled trials were included in the analysis, and 4446 patients were enrolled. OCT was associated with lower MAPE (OR: 0.65, CI:0.47-0.91, p= 0.01) compared to IVUS. ST, DE, and DED were similar between OCT and IVUS. There were no significant differences in MACE (OR: 0.86, CI:0.64-1.16, p= 0.32), all-cause mortality (OR: 0.83, CI:0.42-1.66, p= 0.60), Cardiac death (OR: 0.62, CI:0.20-1.89, p= 0.40), TVMI (OR: 0.69, CI:0.33-1.46, p= 0.33), TVR, (OR: 1.09, CI:0.70-1.71, p= 0.70), and non-fatal stroke (OR: 1.82, CI:0.67-4.95, p= 0.24) one year following the index procedure.
Conclusion Optical coherence tomographic-guided PCI was associated with lower major adverse peri-procedural events (MAPE), including stent thrombosis, distal embolization, and distal edge dissection, compared to intravascular ultrasound-guided PCI. However, there was no difference in overall major adverse cardiac events, target vessel myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization, and nonfatal stroke.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
No external funding was received
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This research was deemed exempt form IRB approval
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Disclosures: None of the Authors have actual or potential conflicts of interest or financial disclosure to disclose.
Data Availability
The data that supports the findings of this study are available in the supplementary material of this article.
