Outcomes of optical coherence tomography guided percutaneous coronary intervention against angiography guided in patients with coronary artery disease: A systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

BACKGROUND

Previous studies compared optical coherence tomography (OCT) guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and angiography-guided was still limited. Therefore, we performed comprehensive meta-analyses to investigate the clinical outcomes of OCT-guided compared with angiography-guided PCI to provide a higher level of evidence.

METHODS

A systematic search from electronic databases such as Pubmed, EMBASE, SpringerLink, and Cochrane Library was conducted to obtain original articles comparing OCT and angiography. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE), cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI), stent thrombosis, target vessel revascularization, stenosis area, PCI procedure time, contrast volume, and procedural side effects were the measured outcomes. The primary end-points were MACE and cardiovascular death.

RESULTS

Total 11 studies included 5814 patients were analyzed, with 3431 using OCT-guided and 2383 using angiography-guided. Pooled estimates of outcomes, presented as odds ratios (OR) [95% confidence intervals], were generated with random-effect models. Regarding clinical outcomes, OCT-guided PCI showed significantly lower rate of MACE (odds ratio [OR] 0.52, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.38 to 0.72, p < 0.001), cardiovascular death (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.67, p < 0.001), and higher contrast volume (OR 1.6, 95% CI 0.81 to 2.39, p < 0.001). OCT-guided has longer PCI procedure time (OR 2.42, 95% CI 1.33 to 4.42, p = 0.004). OCT-guided has no significant difference in lower risk of periprocedural MI (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.00, p = 0.05), stent thrombosis (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.2 to 2.43, p = 0.56), target vessel repeat revascularization (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.14, p = 0.17), stenosis area (OR -0.63, 95% CI -1.5 to 0.25, p = 0.56), and adverse events related to procedures (OR 1.33, 95% CI 0.8 to 2.19, p = 0.27).

CONCLUSION

Our meta-analysis demonstrated that OCT-guided PCI is significantly associated with lower MACE, cardiovascular death, and higher contrast volume. It is also associated with a longer duration of PCI. However, it is not associated with MI, stent thrombosis, target vessel revascularization, stenosis area, and adverse events related to procedures.