English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background: Specific algorithms for use of optical coherence tomography (OCT) to guide percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are scarce. Also, the relative benefits of intravascular imaging guidance have not been tested against an optimized angiography-guided PCI strategy. In iSIGHT (Optical Coherence Tomography Versus Intravascular Ultrasound and Angiography to Guide Percutaneous Coronary Interventions), we aimed to investigate whether OCT-guided PCI achieves noninferior stent expansion compared with intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guidance and if both imaging modalities lead to superior stent expansion compared with an optimized angiography-based strategy. Methods: Patients ≥18 years old undergoing PCI for ≥1 lesion in native coronaries of 2.25 to 4.00 mm in diameter were randomized 1:1:1 to OCT-, IVUS-, or angiography-guided PCI. Predetermined guidance protocols were applied in all groups. An external elastic membrane–based protocol was used for stent sizing by OCT and IVUS. The primary end point was noninferiority of stent expansion (minimum stent area ≥90% of the average reference lumen area), measured by post-PCI OCT, in OCT-guided versus IVUS-guided PCI (noninferiority margin, 6.5%). Results: One hundred fifty-one patients (156 lesions) were randomly allocated to OCT (51 lesions [32.7%]), IVUS (52 lesions [33.3%]), or angiography (53 lesions [34.0%]). Stent expansion with OCT guidance (98.01±16.14%) was noninferior to IVUS (91.69±15.75%; 1-sided lower 95% CI, 0.55 mm2 ;P non-inferiority &lt;0.001) and superior to angiography (90.53±14.84%,P =0.041). IVUS and angiography obtained similar stent expansions (P =0.921). Stent edge dissection and periprocedural complication rates were not significantly different among the groups.Conclusions: Stent expansion with OCT guidance using a dedicated external elastic membrane–based sizing strategy was noninferior to that achieved with IVUS and superior to an optimized angiographic strategy. Registration: URL:plataformabrasil.saude.gov.br ; Unique identifier: 69968417.8.0000.5462.