Comparison of angioscopy, intravascular ultrasound imaging and quantitative coronary angiography in predicting clinical outcome after coronary intervention in high risk patients

Steven Feld, Mazen Ganim, Edgar S. Carell, Olle Kjellgren, Richard L. Kirkeeide, William K. Vaughn, Ron Kelly, A. Iain McGhie, Nancy Kramer, Dan Loyd, H. Vernon Anderson, George Schroth, Richard W. Smalling

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

54 Scopus citations

Abstract

Objectives. The purpose of this study was to identify qualitative or quantitative variables present on angioscopy, intravascular ultrasound imaging or quantitative coronary arteriography that were associated with adverse clinical outcome after coronary intervention in high risk patients. Background. Patients with acute coronary syndromes and complex lesion morphology on angiography are at increased risk for acute complications after coronary angioplasty. Newer devices that primarily remove atheroma have not improved outcome over that of balloon angioplasty. Intravascular imaging can accurately identify intraluminal and intramural histopathologic features not adequately visualized during coronary arteriography and may provide mechanistic insight into the pathogenesis of abrupt closure and restenosis. Methods. Sixty high risk patients with unstable coronary syndromes and complex lesions on angiography underwent angioscopy (n = 40) and intravascular ultrasound imaging (n = 46) during interventional procedures. In 26 patients, both angioscopy and intravascular ultrasound were performed in the same lesion. All patients underwent off-line quantitative coronary arteriography. Coronary interventions included balloon (n = 2) and excimer laser (n = 4) angioplasty, directional (n = 19) and rotational (n = 6) atherectomy and stent implantation (n = 11). Patients were followed up for 1 year for objective evidence of recurrent ischemia. Results. Patients whose clinical presentation included rest angina or acute myocardial infarction or who received thrombolytic therapy within 24 h of procedure were significantly more likely to experience recurrent ischemia after intervention. Plaque rapture or thrombus on preprocedure angioscopy or angioscopic thrombus after intervention were also significantly associated with adverse outcome. Qualitative or quantitative variables on angiography, intravascular ultrasound or off-line quantitative arteriography were not associated with recurrent ischemia on univariate analysis. Multivariate predictors of recurrent ischemia were plaque rupture on preprocedure angioscopy (p < 0.05, odds ratio [OR] 10.15) and angioscopic thrombus after intervention (p < 0.05, OR 7.26). Conclusions. Angioscopic plaque rupture and thrombus were independently associated with adverse outcome in patients with complex lesions after interventional procedures. These features were not identified by either angiography or intravascular ultrasound.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)97-105
Number of pages9
JournalJournal of the American College of Cardiology
Volume28
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1996

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of angioscopy, intravascular ultrasound imaging and quantitative coronary angiography in predicting clinical outcome after coronary intervention in high risk patients'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this