Cargando…
Comparison Between Optical Frequency Domain Imaging and Intravascular Ultrasound for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Guidance in Biolimus A9-Eluting Stent Implantation: A Randomized MISTIC-1 Non-Inferiority Trial
BACKGROUND: Given the characteristic differences between intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and optical frequency domain imaging (OFDI), their approach to therapeutic guidance during percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) and arterial healing response after stenting may also vary. METHODS: MISTIC-1...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7665240/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33106049 http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.120.009314 |
_version_ | 1783609981354901504 |
---|---|
author | Muramatsu, Takashi Ozaki, Yukio Nanasato, Mamoru Ishikawa, Masato Nagasaka, Ryo Ohota, Masaya Hashimoto, Yosuke Yoshiki, Yu Takatsu, Hidemaro Ito, Katsuyoshi Kamiya, Hiroki Yoshida, Yukihiko Murohara, Toyoaki Izawa, Hideo |
author_facet | Muramatsu, Takashi Ozaki, Yukio Nanasato, Mamoru Ishikawa, Masato Nagasaka, Ryo Ohota, Masaya Hashimoto, Yosuke Yoshiki, Yu Takatsu, Hidemaro Ito, Katsuyoshi Kamiya, Hiroki Yoshida, Yukihiko Murohara, Toyoaki Izawa, Hideo |
author_sort | Muramatsu, Takashi |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Given the characteristic differences between intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and optical frequency domain imaging (OFDI), their approach to therapeutic guidance during percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) and arterial healing response after stenting may also vary. METHODS: MISTIC-1 (The Multimodality Imaging Study in Cardiology cohort 1) is a multicenter, randomized-controlled, noninferiority trial that compared imaging end points between OFDI- and IVUS-guided PCI. Patients with stable coronary artery disease were randomly assigned to either OFDI- or IVUS-guided PCI using a Biolimus A9-eluting stent according to a prespecified protocol for imaging guidance. Stent sizing was based on external elastic lamina in IVUS-guided PCI while lumen up-size in OFDI-guided PCI. Postprocedural OFDI was investigated regardless of randomization, while operators in IVUS-guided PCI arm were blinded to the images. The primary end point was in-segment minimum lumen area assessed using OFDI at 8 months, while the secondary end point was a composite of cardiovascular mortality, target-vessel myocardial infarction, or target-lesion revascularization (device-oriented composite end point). Patients were followed up to 3 years after the index procedure. RESULTS: A total of 109 patients (mean age 70 years, male 78%) with 126 lesions were enrolled. Postprocedural minimum stent area was 6.31±1.89 and 6.72±2.08 mm(2) in OFDI and IVUS group, respectively (P=0.26). At the 8-month follow-up, in-segment minimum lumen area was 4.56±1.94 and 4.13±1.86 mm(2) in OFDI and IVUS group, respectively (P(non-inferiority) <0.001). Both groups had comparable neointimal healing score (median 0.16 [interquartile range, 0.00–3.14] versus 0.90 [0.00–3.30], respectively; P=0.43). The incidence rate of device-oriented composite end point at 3 years was 7.4% and 7.3% in OFDI and IVUS group, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.26–4.18]; P=0.95). CONCLUSIONS: OFDI-guided PCI was not inferior to IVUS-guided PCI in terms of in-segment minimum lumen area at 8 months. Although a small sample size was acknowledged, OFDI could be an alternative to IVUS when considering intracoronary imaging-guided PCI in selected populations with coronary artery diseases. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT03292081. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7665240 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-76652402020-11-16 Comparison Between Optical Frequency Domain Imaging and Intravascular Ultrasound for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Guidance in Biolimus A9-Eluting Stent Implantation: A Randomized MISTIC-1 Non-Inferiority Trial Muramatsu, Takashi Ozaki, Yukio Nanasato, Mamoru Ishikawa, Masato Nagasaka, Ryo Ohota, Masaya Hashimoto, Yosuke Yoshiki, Yu Takatsu, Hidemaro Ito, Katsuyoshi Kamiya, Hiroki Yoshida, Yukihiko Murohara, Toyoaki Izawa, Hideo Circ Cardiovasc Interv Original Articles BACKGROUND: Given the characteristic differences between intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and optical frequency domain imaging (OFDI), their approach to therapeutic guidance during percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) and arterial healing response after stenting may also vary. METHODS: MISTIC-1 (The Multimodality Imaging Study in Cardiology cohort 1) is a multicenter, randomized-controlled, noninferiority trial that compared imaging end points between OFDI- and IVUS-guided PCI. Patients with stable coronary artery disease were randomly assigned to either OFDI- or IVUS-guided PCI using a Biolimus A9-eluting stent according to a prespecified protocol for imaging guidance. Stent sizing was based on external elastic lamina in IVUS-guided PCI while lumen up-size in OFDI-guided PCI. Postprocedural OFDI was investigated regardless of randomization, while operators in IVUS-guided PCI arm were blinded to the images. The primary end point was in-segment minimum lumen area assessed using OFDI at 8 months, while the secondary end point was a composite of cardiovascular mortality, target-vessel myocardial infarction, or target-lesion revascularization (device-oriented composite end point). Patients were followed up to 3 years after the index procedure. RESULTS: A total of 109 patients (mean age 70 years, male 78%) with 126 lesions were enrolled. Postprocedural minimum stent area was 6.31±1.89 and 6.72±2.08 mm(2) in OFDI and IVUS group, respectively (P=0.26). At the 8-month follow-up, in-segment minimum lumen area was 4.56±1.94 and 4.13±1.86 mm(2) in OFDI and IVUS group, respectively (P(non-inferiority) <0.001). Both groups had comparable neointimal healing score (median 0.16 [interquartile range, 0.00–3.14] versus 0.90 [0.00–3.30], respectively; P=0.43). The incidence rate of device-oriented composite end point at 3 years was 7.4% and 7.3% in OFDI and IVUS group, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.26–4.18]; P=0.95). CONCLUSIONS: OFDI-guided PCI was not inferior to IVUS-guided PCI in terms of in-segment minimum lumen area at 8 months. Although a small sample size was acknowledged, OFDI could be an alternative to IVUS when considering intracoronary imaging-guided PCI in selected populations with coronary artery diseases. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT03292081. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2020-10-27 /pmc/articles/PMC7665240/ /pubmed/33106049 http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.120.009314 Text en © 2020 The Authors. Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions is published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial-NoDerivs (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided that the original work is properly cited, the use is noncommercial, and no modifications or adaptations are made. |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Muramatsu, Takashi Ozaki, Yukio Nanasato, Mamoru Ishikawa, Masato Nagasaka, Ryo Ohota, Masaya Hashimoto, Yosuke Yoshiki, Yu Takatsu, Hidemaro Ito, Katsuyoshi Kamiya, Hiroki Yoshida, Yukihiko Murohara, Toyoaki Izawa, Hideo Comparison Between Optical Frequency Domain Imaging and Intravascular Ultrasound for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Guidance in Biolimus A9-Eluting Stent Implantation: A Randomized MISTIC-1 Non-Inferiority Trial |
title | Comparison Between Optical Frequency Domain Imaging and Intravascular Ultrasound for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Guidance in Biolimus A9-Eluting Stent Implantation: A Randomized MISTIC-1 Non-Inferiority Trial |
title_full | Comparison Between Optical Frequency Domain Imaging and Intravascular Ultrasound for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Guidance in Biolimus A9-Eluting Stent Implantation: A Randomized MISTIC-1 Non-Inferiority Trial |
title_fullStr | Comparison Between Optical Frequency Domain Imaging and Intravascular Ultrasound for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Guidance in Biolimus A9-Eluting Stent Implantation: A Randomized MISTIC-1 Non-Inferiority Trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison Between Optical Frequency Domain Imaging and Intravascular Ultrasound for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Guidance in Biolimus A9-Eluting Stent Implantation: A Randomized MISTIC-1 Non-Inferiority Trial |
title_short | Comparison Between Optical Frequency Domain Imaging and Intravascular Ultrasound for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Guidance in Biolimus A9-Eluting Stent Implantation: A Randomized MISTIC-1 Non-Inferiority Trial |
title_sort | comparison between optical frequency domain imaging and intravascular ultrasound for percutaneous coronary intervention guidance in biolimus a9-eluting stent implantation: a randomized mistic-1 non-inferiority trial |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7665240/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33106049 http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.120.009314 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT muramatsutakashi comparisonbetweenopticalfrequencydomainimagingandintravascularultrasoundforpercutaneouscoronaryinterventionguidanceinbiolimusa9elutingstentimplantationarandomizedmistic1noninferioritytrial AT ozakiyukio comparisonbetweenopticalfrequencydomainimagingandintravascularultrasoundforpercutaneouscoronaryinterventionguidanceinbiolimusa9elutingstentimplantationarandomizedmistic1noninferioritytrial AT nanasatomamoru comparisonbetweenopticalfrequencydomainimagingandintravascularultrasoundforpercutaneouscoronaryinterventionguidanceinbiolimusa9elutingstentimplantationarandomizedmistic1noninferioritytrial AT ishikawamasato comparisonbetweenopticalfrequencydomainimagingandintravascularultrasoundforpercutaneouscoronaryinterventionguidanceinbiolimusa9elutingstentimplantationarandomizedmistic1noninferioritytrial AT nagasakaryo comparisonbetweenopticalfrequencydomainimagingandintravascularultrasoundforpercutaneouscoronaryinterventionguidanceinbiolimusa9elutingstentimplantationarandomizedmistic1noninferioritytrial AT ohotamasaya comparisonbetweenopticalfrequencydomainimagingandintravascularultrasoundforpercutaneouscoronaryinterventionguidanceinbiolimusa9elutingstentimplantationarandomizedmistic1noninferioritytrial AT hashimotoyosuke comparisonbetweenopticalfrequencydomainimagingandintravascularultrasoundforpercutaneouscoronaryinterventionguidanceinbiolimusa9elutingstentimplantationarandomizedmistic1noninferioritytrial AT yoshikiyu comparisonbetweenopticalfrequencydomainimagingandintravascularultrasoundforpercutaneouscoronaryinterventionguidanceinbiolimusa9elutingstentimplantationarandomizedmistic1noninferioritytrial AT takatsuhidemaro comparisonbetweenopticalfrequencydomainimagingandintravascularultrasoundforpercutaneouscoronaryinterventionguidanceinbiolimusa9elutingstentimplantationarandomizedmistic1noninferioritytrial AT itokatsuyoshi comparisonbetweenopticalfrequencydomainimagingandintravascularultrasoundforpercutaneouscoronaryinterventionguidanceinbiolimusa9elutingstentimplantationarandomizedmistic1noninferioritytrial AT kamiyahiroki comparisonbetweenopticalfrequencydomainimagingandintravascularultrasoundforpercutaneouscoronaryinterventionguidanceinbiolimusa9elutingstentimplantationarandomizedmistic1noninferioritytrial AT yoshidayukihiko comparisonbetweenopticalfrequencydomainimagingandintravascularultrasoundforpercutaneouscoronaryinterventionguidanceinbiolimusa9elutingstentimplantationarandomizedmistic1noninferioritytrial AT muroharatoyoaki comparisonbetweenopticalfrequencydomainimagingandintravascularultrasoundforpercutaneouscoronaryinterventionguidanceinbiolimusa9elutingstentimplantationarandomizedmistic1noninferioritytrial AT izawahideo comparisonbetweenopticalfrequencydomainimagingandintravascularultrasoundforpercutaneouscoronaryinterventionguidanceinbiolimusa9elutingstentimplantationarandomizedmistic1noninferioritytrial |