Abstract
Objective To evaluate comparative prognosis between intravascular imaging-guided PCI and angiography-guided PCI using a comprehensive meta-analysis including all previous randomized controlled trials.
Design Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Data Sources Target trials were selected by a systematic electronic search strategy in the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases from their inception to Sep, 2023.
Study Selection Published randomized controlled trials which compared clinical outcomes between intravascular imaging-guided and angiography-guided PCI were included.
Main Outcome and Measures Major adverse cardiac events (MACE), all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), target vessel revascularization (TVR), and stent thrombosis.
Review Methods Random-effects model was used to calculate pooled relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) between intravascular imaging-guided and angiography-guided PCI. Heterogeneity was assessed by I2 values.
Results Among a total of 14,037 patients (7,383 in intravascular imaging-guided PCI and 6,654 in angiography-guided PCI groups), intravascular imaging-guided PCI was associated with a lower risk of MACE than angiography-guided PCI (RR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.84; P<0.001; I2, 18.9%), driven by lower risk of MI (RR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.97; P=0.019; I2, 0.0%), TVR (RR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.79; P<0.001; I2, 0.0%), and stent thrombosis (RR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.32 to 0.78; P=0.002; I2, 0.0%). There was no difference in the risk of all-cause death (RR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.67 to 1.01; P=0.068; I2, 0.0%), however, trials with 2nd generation drug-eluting stent (DES) showed significant reduction of all-cause death following intravascular imaging-guided PCI (RR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.95; P=0.018; I2, 0.0%).
Conclusions Compared to angiography-guided PCI, intravascular imaging-guided PCI was associated with a reduced the risk of MACE, by lowering the risks of MI, TVR, and stent thrombosis. Pooled analysis of trials with 2nd generation DES showed significantly lower risk of all-cause death following intravascular imaging-guided PCI than angiography-guided PCI.
Systematic Review Registration PROSPERO, CRD42023402677
Due to limited sample size, previous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were not able to show significant differences in the risks of hard clinical events such as death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stent thrombosis between intravascular imaging-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and angiography-guided PCI.
Although previous meta-analyses showed that intravascular imaging-guided PCI resulted in a lower risk of death or MI than angiography-guided PCI, inclusion of both observational studies and RCTs caused heterogeneity and lowered the evidence level of the results.
The current meta-analysis exclusively included 24 RCTs and showed that intravascular imaging-guided PCI significantly reduced the risk of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), compared with angiography-guided PCI.
It should be noted that intravascular imaging-guided PCI reduced not only the risk of target-vessel revascularization but also the risks of hard clinical events such as MI and stent thrombosis.
Competing Interest Statement
Dr. Joo Myung Lee received an Institutional Research Grant from Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, Philips Volcano, Terumo Corporation, Zoll Medical, and Donga-ST. Prof. Joo-Yong Hahn received an Institutional Research Grant from National Evidence-based Healthcare Collaborating Agency, Ministry of Health & Welfare, Korea, Abbott Vascular, Biosensors, Boston Scientific, Daiichi Sankyo, Donga-ST, Hanmi Pharmaceutical, and Medtronic Inc. Prof. Hyeon-Cheol Gwon received an Institutional Research Grant from Boston Scientific, Genoss, and Medtronic Inc. All other authors declare that there are no competing interests to declare.
Clinical Protocols
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=402677
Funding Statement
None
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:
The current study-level meta-analysis used the published trials data.
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
Abbreviations
- CI
- confidence interval
- DES
- drug-eluting stent
- IVUS
- intravascular ultrasound
- MACE
- major adverse cardiac events
- MI
- myocardial infarction
- OCT
- optical coherence tomography
- OR
- odds ratio
- PCI
- percutaneous coronary intervention
- RCT
- randomized controlled trial
- TVR
- target vessel revascularization
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.