Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39261775›Full record

SynthesisBMC cardiovascular disorders2024

Intravascular imaging-guided versus angiography-guided percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Ahmed Mazen Amin, Yehya Khlidj, Mohamed Abuelazm, Ahmed Sayed, Ubaid Khan, Mariam Mahmoud Elewidi, Mohammad Tanashat, Hesham Elharti, Mohamed Hatem Ellabban, Abdullah K Alassiri and 3 more

Abstract readSystematic ReviewNetwork Meta-Analysis
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Ahmed Mazen AminFaculty of Medicine, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt.
Yehya KhlidjFaculty of Medicine, Algiers University, Algiers, Algeria.
Mohamed AbuelazmFaculty of Medicine, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt.
Ahmed SayedFaculty of Medicine, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt.
Ubaid KhanDivision of Cardiology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Mariam Mahmoud ElewidiFaculty of Medicine, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt.
Mohammad TanashatFaculty of Medicine, Yarmouk University, Irbid, Jordan.
Hesham ElhartiFaculty of Medicine, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt. hisham_M30898424@med.tanta.edu.eg.
Mohamed Hatem EllabbanFaculty of Medicine, Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt.
Abdullah K AlassiriFaculty of Medicine, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Mohamad AlsaedDepartment of Medicine, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV, USA.
Basel AbdelazeemDepartment of Cardiology, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV, USA.
Akram KawsaraDepartment of Cardiology, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPercutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has become one of the most commonly performed interventional life-saving procedures worldwide. Intravascular Imaging (intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and optical coherence tomography (OCT)) have initially evolved to guide PCI compared with angiography. However, this technology is not universally employed in all PCI procedures, and there is ongoing controversy regarding its additional benefits to patient outcomes. We aim to estimate the efficacy and safety of imaging modalities during PCI, allowing pre-, per, and post-intervention assessment of coronary vascularization.

methodsA systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), which were retrieved from PubMed, WOS, SCOPUS, EMBASE, and CENTRAL through September 2023. We used R, version 4.2.0. Effect sizes will be presented as odds ratios with accompanying 95% credible intervals. PROSPERO ID: CRD42024507821.

resultsOur study, encompassing 36 RCTs with a total of 17,572 patients, revelead that compared to conventional angiography, IVUS significantly reduced the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (OR: 0.71 [95% CrI: 0.56 to 0.87]) but not OCT (OR: 0.91 [95% CrI: 0.62 to 1.39]), IVUS and OCT significantly reduced the risk of cardiac death (OR: 0.50 [95% CrI: 0.33 to 0.76]) and (OR: 0.55 [95% CrI: 0.31 to 0.98]), respectively, IVUS significantly reduced the risk of target vessel-related revascularization (OR: 0.60 [95% CrI: 0.48 to 0.75]) but not OCT (OR: 0.86 [95% CrI: 0.60 to 1.19]), IVUS and OCT significantly reduced the risk of stent thrombosis (OR: 0.50 [95% CrI: 0.28 to 0.92]) and (OR: 0.48 [95% CrI: 0.22 to 0.98]), respectively, IVUS significantly reduced the risk of re-stenosis (OR: 0.65 [95% CrI: 0.46 to 0.88]) but not OCT (OR: 0.55 [95% CrI: 0.15 to 1.99]), neither IVUS (OR: 0.97 [95% CrI: 0.71 to 1.38]) nor OCT (OR: 0.75 [95% CrI: 0.49 to 1.22]) were associated with statistically significant reductions in all-cause mortality, neither IVUS (OR: 0.70 [95% CrI: 0.45 to 1.32]) nor OCT (OR: 0.81 [95% CrI: 0.47 to 1.59]) were associated with statistically significant reductions in target vessel failure, neither IVUS (OR: 0.88 [95% CrI: 0.43 to 2.44]) nor OCT (OR: 0.81 [95% CrI: 0.37 to 2.04]) were associated with statistically significant reductions in target lesion failure, and neither IVUS (OR: 0.82 [95% CrI: 0.60 to 1.06]) nor OCT (OR: 0.84 [95% CrI: 0.59 to 1.19]) were associated with statistically significant reductions in myocardial infarction.

conclusionIntravascular imaging-guided, including IVUS and OCT, improved the postinterventional outcomes of PCI, notably suggesting their advantage over traditional angiography with no significant difference between IVUS and OCT.

Indexed as

Coronary AngiographyCoronary Artery DiseasePercutaneous Coronary InterventionRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicUltrasonography, InterventionalAgedBayes TheoremCoronary VesselsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsTomography, Optical CoherenceAngiographyCoronary artery diseaseIntravascular ultrasoundOptical coherence tomographyPercutaneous coronary intervention

Identifiers

PMID39261775
PMCPMC11389231

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.