Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Current Use of Intracoronary Imaging in Interventional Practice - Results of a European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) and Japanese Association of Cardiovascular Interventions and Therapeutics (CVIT) Clinical Practice Survey.
Koskinas, Konstantinos C; Nakamura, Masato; Räber, Lorenz; Colleran, Roisin; Kadota, Kazushige; Capodanno, Davide; Wijns, William; Akasaka, Takashi; Valgimigli, Marco; Guagliumi, Giulio; Windecker, Stephan; Byrne, Robert A.
  • Koskinas KC; Department of Cardiology, Bern University Hospital.
  • Nakamura M; Toho University, Ohashi Medical Center.
  • Räber L; Department of Cardiology, Bern University Hospital.
  • Colleran R; Deutsches Herzzentrum München, Technische Universität München.
  • Kadota K; Kurashiki Central Hospital.
  • Capodanno D; Ferrarotto Hospital, University of Catania.
  • Wijns W; The Lambe Institute for Translational Medicine and Curam Saolta University Healthcare Group.
  • Akasaka T; Wakayama Medical University.
  • Valgimigli M; Department of Cardiology, Bern University Hospital.
  • Guagliumi G; Interventional Cardiology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliera Papa Giovanni XXIII.
  • Windecker S; Department of Cardiology, Bern University Hospital.
  • Byrne RA; Deutsches Herzzentrum München, Technische Universität München.
Circ J ; 82(5): 1360-1368, 2018 04 25.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29540631
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

This study evaluated the views of the cardiology community on the clinical use of coronary intravascular imaging (IVI).Methods and 

Results:

A web-based survey was distributed to 31,893 individuals, with 1,105 responses received (3.5% response rate); 1,010 of 1,097 respondents (92.1%) self-reported as interventional cardiologists, 754 (68.7%) with >10 years experience. Overall, 96.1% had personal experience with IVI (95.5% with intravascular ultrasound [IVUS], 69.8% with optical coherence tomography [OCT], and 7.9% with near-infrared spectroscopy); 34.7% of respondents were from Europe and 52.0% were from Asia (45.4% from Japan). The most commonly reported indications for IVI were optimization of stenting (88.5%), procedural/strategy guidance (79.6%), and guidance of left main interventions (77.0%). Most respondents reported perceived equipoise regarding choice between IVUS and OCT for guidance of coronary intervention. High cost (65.9%) and prolongation of the procedure (35.0%) were the most commonly reported factors limiting use. IVI was used more frequently (>15% of cases guided by IVI) in Japan than Europe (96.6% vs. 10.4%, respectively; P<0.001) and by operators with longer interventional experience.

CONCLUSIONS:

In a sample of predominantly experienced interventional cardiologists, there was a high rate of personal experience with IVI in clinical practice. The most commonly identified indications for IVI were optimization of stenting, procedural/strategy guidance, and guidance of left main interventions. Variability in practice patterns is substantial according to geographic region and interventional experience.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria / Stents / Ultrasonografía Intervencional / Tomografía de Coherencia Óptica / Intervención Coronaria Percutánea Tipo de estudio: Clinical_trials / Guideline / Prognostic_studies / Qualitative_research / Risk_factors_studies Límite: Adult / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged País como asunto: Asia / Europa Idioma: En Año: 2018 Tipo del documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria / Stents / Ultrasonografía Intervencional / Tomografía de Coherencia Óptica / Intervención Coronaria Percutánea Tipo de estudio: Clinical_trials / Guideline / Prognostic_studies / Qualitative_research / Risk_factors_studies Límite: Adult / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged País como asunto: Asia / Europa Idioma: En Año: 2018 Tipo del documento: Article