IVUS GUIDED VERSUS MULTI-SLICE CT CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY PLANNED PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY INTERVENTION COMPARED TO THE CONVENTIONAL CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY GUIDED INTERVENTION.
Iskandar, M., Abdel Kader, K., Kamal, D., El Kashlan, Y., Khashaba, A., Okasha, N. (2019). IVUS GUIDED VERSUS MULTI-SLICE CT CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY PLANNED PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY INTERVENTION COMPARED TO THE CONVENTIONAL CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY GUIDED INTERVENTION.. EKB Journal Management System, 70(10, 11 & 12), 657-667. doi: 10.21608/asmj.2019.101275
Mina Iskandar; Khaled Abdel Kader; Diaa Kamal; Yasser El Kashlan; Ahmed Khashaba; Nireen Okasha. "IVUS GUIDED VERSUS MULTI-SLICE CT CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY PLANNED PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY INTERVENTION COMPARED TO THE CONVENTIONAL CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY GUIDED INTERVENTION.". EKB Journal Management System, 70, 10, 11 & 12, 2019, 657-667. doi: 10.21608/asmj.2019.101275
Iskandar, M., Abdel Kader, K., Kamal, D., El Kashlan, Y., Khashaba, A., Okasha, N. (2019). 'IVUS GUIDED VERSUS MULTI-SLICE CT CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY PLANNED PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY INTERVENTION COMPARED TO THE CONVENTIONAL CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY GUIDED INTERVENTION.', EKB Journal Management System, 70(10, 11 & 12), pp. 657-667. doi: 10.21608/asmj.2019.101275
Iskandar, M., Abdel Kader, K., Kamal, D., El Kashlan, Y., Khashaba, A., Okasha, N. IVUS GUIDED VERSUS MULTI-SLICE CT CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY PLANNED PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY INTERVENTION COMPARED TO THE CONVENTIONAL CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY GUIDED INTERVENTION.. EKB Journal Management System, 2019; 70(10, 11 & 12): 657-667. doi: 10.21608/asmj.2019.101275

IVUS GUIDED VERSUS MULTI-SLICE CT CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY PLANNED PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY INTERVENTION COMPARED TO THE CONVENTIONAL CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY GUIDED INTERVENTION.

Ain Shams Medical Journal
Article 9, Volume 70, 10, 11 & 12, July 2019, Page 657-667  XML PDF (255.21 K)
Document Type: Original Article
DOI: 10.21608/asmj.2019.101275
View on SCiNiTO View on SCiNiTO
Authors
Mina Iskandar; Khaled Abdel Kader; Diaa Kamal; Yasser El Kashlan; Ahmed Khashaba; Nireen Okasha
Department of Cardiology, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt.
Abstract
Background: Intra-vascular ultrasound (IVUS) and coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) are tools to guide
percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Aim of the work: This study aimed at comparing procedural outcome and MACCEs of IVUS, CCTA and angiography, guided PCI. Patients and methods: Prospective, single centered study. 90
patients undergoing elective PCI distributed to 3 groups. Group A: IVUS guided PCI, group B: CCTA planned PCI and group C: angiography guided PCI. Procedural details and MACCEs were compared. Results: Most of the patients in this study were males (84.4%). Group B used significant amount of contrast, 50 - 380 ml (161.67 ± 71.97, P = 0.042). Also group B had significant longer stents, 12 - 48mm (23.76 ± 7.47, P = 0.008). Group A had significant number of
patients who needed post-stenting balloon dilatation, 28 patients (93.34%), P=0.009.Most of the patients had satisfactory results withTIMI 3 flow (94.37%). No MACCEs were detected during the hospital stay. At 30 days follow-up, no significant difference found between the 3 groups. Conclusion: IVUS assed accurately the need of post-stenting balloon dilatation. CCTA is associated with larger amount of contrast use, longer lesion detection and subsequent longer stents deployed in
comparison to IVUS and angiography alone.
Keywords
IVUS; CCTA; angiography; guided; contrast; post; stenting; lesion length; procedural outcome
Statistics
Article View: 147
PDF Download: 205