Is quantitative coronary angiography reliable in assessing the lumen gain after treatment with the everolimus-eluting bioresorbable polylactide scaffold?

© 2016 Europa Digital & Publishing. All rights reserved. Aims: The current study aimed to assess the difference in lumen dimension measurements between optical coherence tomography (OCT) and quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) in the polymeric bioresorbable scaffold and metallic stent. Met...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Sotomi Y., Onuma Y., Suwannasom P., Tateishi H., Tenekecioglu E., Zeng Y., Cavalcante R., Jonker H., Dijkstra J., Foin N., Koon J., Collet C., De Winter R., Wykrzykowska J., Stone G., Popma J., Kozuma K., Tanabe K., Serruys P., Kimura T.
Format: Journal
Published: 2017
Online Access:https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84994613857&origin=inward
http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/41508
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Institution: Chiang Mai University
id th-cmuir.6653943832-41508
record_format dspace
spelling th-cmuir.6653943832-415082017-09-28T04:21:45Z Is quantitative coronary angiography reliable in assessing the lumen gain after treatment with the everolimus-eluting bioresorbable polylactide scaffold? Sotomi Y. Onuma Y. Suwannasom P. Tateishi H. Tenekecioglu E. Zeng Y. Cavalcante R. Jonker H. Dijkstra J. Foin N. Koon J. Collet C. De Winter R. Wykrzykowska J. Stone G. Popma J. Kozuma K. Tanabe K. Serruys P. Kimura T. © 2016 Europa Digital & Publishing. All rights reserved. Aims: The current study aimed to assess the difference in lumen dimension measurements between optical coherence tomography (OCT) and quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) in the polymeric bioresorbable scaffold and metallic stent. Methods and results: In the randomised ABSORB Japan trial, 87 lesions in the Absorb arm and 44 lesions in the XIENCE arm were analysed. Post-procedural OCT-QCA lumen dimensions were assessed in matched proximal/distal non-stented/non-scaffolded reference (n=199), scaffolded (n=145) and stented (n=75) cross-sections at the two device edges using the Bland-Altman method. In the non-stented/nonscaffolded reference segments, QCA systematically underestimated lumen diameter (LD) compared with OCT (accuracy,-0.26 mm; precision, 0.47 mm; 95% limits of agreement as a mean bias±1.96 standard deviation,-1.18-0.66 mm). When compared to OCT, QCA of the Absorb led to a more severe underestimation of the LD (-0.30 mm; 0.39 mm;-1.06-0.46 mm) than with the XIENCE (-0.14 mm; 0.31 mm;-0.75-0.46 mm). QCA underestimated LD by 9.1%, 4.9%, and 9.8% in the reference, stented, and scaffolded segments, respectively. The protrusion distance of struts was larger in the Absorb arm than in the XIENCE arm (135±27 μm vs. 18±26 μm, p < 0.001), and may have contributed to the observed differences. Conclusions: In-device QCA measurement was differently affected by the presence of a metallic or polymeric scaffold, a fact that had a significant impact on the QCA assessment of acute gain and post-procedural minimum LD. 2017-09-28T04:21:45Z 2017-09-28T04:21:45Z 2016-10-01 Journal 1774024X 2-s2.0-84994613857 10.4244/EIJV12I8A163 https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84994613857&origin=inward http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/41508
institution Chiang Mai University
building Chiang Mai University Library
country Thailand
collection CMU Intellectual Repository
description © 2016 Europa Digital & Publishing. All rights reserved. Aims: The current study aimed to assess the difference in lumen dimension measurements between optical coherence tomography (OCT) and quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) in the polymeric bioresorbable scaffold and metallic stent. Methods and results: In the randomised ABSORB Japan trial, 87 lesions in the Absorb arm and 44 lesions in the XIENCE arm were analysed. Post-procedural OCT-QCA lumen dimensions were assessed in matched proximal/distal non-stented/non-scaffolded reference (n=199), scaffolded (n=145) and stented (n=75) cross-sections at the two device edges using the Bland-Altman method. In the non-stented/nonscaffolded reference segments, QCA systematically underestimated lumen diameter (LD) compared with OCT (accuracy,-0.26 mm; precision, 0.47 mm; 95% limits of agreement as a mean bias±1.96 standard deviation,-1.18-0.66 mm). When compared to OCT, QCA of the Absorb led to a more severe underestimation of the LD (-0.30 mm; 0.39 mm;-1.06-0.46 mm) than with the XIENCE (-0.14 mm; 0.31 mm;-0.75-0.46 mm). QCA underestimated LD by 9.1%, 4.9%, and 9.8% in the reference, stented, and scaffolded segments, respectively. The protrusion distance of struts was larger in the Absorb arm than in the XIENCE arm (135±27 μm vs. 18±26 μm, p < 0.001), and may have contributed to the observed differences. Conclusions: In-device QCA measurement was differently affected by the presence of a metallic or polymeric scaffold, a fact that had a significant impact on the QCA assessment of acute gain and post-procedural minimum LD.
format Journal
author Sotomi Y.
Onuma Y.
Suwannasom P.
Tateishi H.
Tenekecioglu E.
Zeng Y.
Cavalcante R.
Jonker H.
Dijkstra J.
Foin N.
Koon J.
Collet C.
De Winter R.
Wykrzykowska J.
Stone G.
Popma J.
Kozuma K.
Tanabe K.
Serruys P.
Kimura T.
spellingShingle Sotomi Y.
Onuma Y.
Suwannasom P.
Tateishi H.
Tenekecioglu E.
Zeng Y.
Cavalcante R.
Jonker H.
Dijkstra J.
Foin N.
Koon J.
Collet C.
De Winter R.
Wykrzykowska J.
Stone G.
Popma J.
Kozuma K.
Tanabe K.
Serruys P.
Kimura T.
Is quantitative coronary angiography reliable in assessing the lumen gain after treatment with the everolimus-eluting bioresorbable polylactide scaffold?
author_facet Sotomi Y.
Onuma Y.
Suwannasom P.
Tateishi H.
Tenekecioglu E.
Zeng Y.
Cavalcante R.
Jonker H.
Dijkstra J.
Foin N.
Koon J.
Collet C.
De Winter R.
Wykrzykowska J.
Stone G.
Popma J.
Kozuma K.
Tanabe K.
Serruys P.
Kimura T.
author_sort Sotomi Y.
title Is quantitative coronary angiography reliable in assessing the lumen gain after treatment with the everolimus-eluting bioresorbable polylactide scaffold?
title_short Is quantitative coronary angiography reliable in assessing the lumen gain after treatment with the everolimus-eluting bioresorbable polylactide scaffold?
title_full Is quantitative coronary angiography reliable in assessing the lumen gain after treatment with the everolimus-eluting bioresorbable polylactide scaffold?
title_fullStr Is quantitative coronary angiography reliable in assessing the lumen gain after treatment with the everolimus-eluting bioresorbable polylactide scaffold?
title_full_unstemmed Is quantitative coronary angiography reliable in assessing the lumen gain after treatment with the everolimus-eluting bioresorbable polylactide scaffold?
title_sort is quantitative coronary angiography reliable in assessing the lumen gain after treatment with the everolimus-eluting bioresorbable polylactide scaffold?
publishDate 2017
url https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84994613857&origin=inward
http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/41508
_version_ 1681422014989991936