Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 11, 2025

Interventional Diagnostic Procedure: A Practical Guide for the Assessment of Coronary Vascular Function
Published on: March 15, 2022
Intravascular imaging guided versus coronary angiography guided percutaneous coronary intervention: systematic review
Safi U Khan1, Siddharth Agarwal2, Hassaan B Arshad1
1Department of Cardiology, Houston Methodist DeBakey Heart and Vascular Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Insights
Intravascular imaging guidance for percutaneous coronary intervention significantly reduces cardiac death and adverse cardiovascular events in patients with coronary artery disease. These benefits increase with higher patient baseline risk, showing substantial absolute risk reductions.
Area of Science:
- Cardiovascular Medicine
- Interventional Cardiology
Background:
- Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is a cornerstone in managing coronary artery disease (CAD).
- Optimal PCI guidance remains crucial for improving patient outcomes.
- Intravascular imaging (IVI) offers detailed vessel visualization beyond standard angiography.
Approach:
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of 20 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 11,698 patients.
- Compared IVI-guided PCI (using intravascular ultrasonography or optical coherence tomography) with angiography-guided PCI.
- Utilized random-effects meta-analysis and GRADE methodology to assess evidence certainty and absolute risk differences based on SYNTAX risk categories.
Key Points:
- IVI-guided PCI significantly reduced risks of cardiac death (RR 0.53), myocardial infarction (RR 0.81), stent thrombosis (RR 0.44), and revascularization events.
- High certainty evidence demonstrated absolute risk reductions per 1000 people: 23-64 fewer cardiac deaths, 15-19 fewer MIs, 9-13 fewer stent thromboses, 28-38 fewer TVRs, and 35-48 fewer TLRs.
- Absolute benefits were proportional to baseline cardiovascular risk, highlighting the importance of IVI in higher-risk patients.
Conclusions:
- IVI-guided PCI is superior to angiography-guided PCI for improving cardiovascular outcomes in CAD patients.
- The absolute treatment effect of IVI-guided PCI is significantly influenced by patient baseline risk, particularly in those with complex coronary artery disease.
- These findings support the routine use of intravascular imaging to optimize PCI strategy and reduce adverse events.
Objective:
To assess the absolute treatment effects of intravascular imaging guided versus angiography guided percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with coronary artery disease, considering their baseline risk.
Design:
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
Data Sources:
PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases up to 31 August 2023.
Study Selection:
Randomized controlled trials comparing intravascular imaging (intravascular ultrasonography or optical coherence tomography) guided versus coronary angiography guided percutaneous coronary intervention in adults with coronary artery disease.
Main Outcome Measures:
Random effect meta-analysis and GRADE (grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation) were used to assess certainty of evidence. Data included rate ratios and absolute risks per 1000 people for cardiac death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, target vessel revascularization, and target lesion revascularization. Absolute risk differences were estimated using SYNTAX risk categories for baseline risks at five years, assuming constant rate ratios across different cardiovascular risk thresholds.
Results:
In 20 randomized controlled trials (n=11 698), intravascular imaging guided percutaneous coronary intervention was associated with a reduced risk of cardiac death (rate ratio 0.53, 95% confidence interval 0.39 to 0.72), myocardial infarction (0.81, 0.68 to 0.97), stent thrombosis (0.44, 0.27 to 0.72), target vessel revascularization (0.74, 0.61 to 0.89), and target lesion revascularization (0.71, 0.59 to 0.86) but not all cause death (0.81, 0.64 to 1.02). Using SYNTAX risk categories, high certainty evidence showed that from low risk to high risk, intravascular imaging was likely associated with 23 to 64 fewer cardiac deaths, 15 to 19 fewer myocardial infarctions, 9 to 13 fewer stent thrombosis events, 28 to 38 fewer target vessel revascularization events, and 35 to 48 fewer target lesion revascularization events per 1000 people.
Conclusions:
Compared with coronary angiography guided percutaneous coronary intervention, intravascular imaging guided percutaneous coronary intervention was associated with significantly reduced cardiac death and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with coronary artery disease. The estimated absolute effects of intravascular imaging guided percutaneous coronary intervention showed a proportional relation with baseline risk, driven by the severity and complexity of coronary artery disease.
Systematic Review Registration:
PROSPERO CRD42023433568.
Related Concept Videos
Coronary Artery Disease V: Interprofessional Care
Imaging Studies for Cardiovascular System V: CT
Cardiac Catheterization I: Pre-Procedure Overview
Acute Coronary Syndrome III: Diagnostic Studies
Acute Coronary Syndrome IV: Interprofessional Care
Angina IV: Management

